antelope valley line study - metromedia.metro.net/.../avl_study_appendix_2-task_4.pdf ·...

Antelope Valley Line Study

Appendix 2

Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios

AVL

ANTELOPE VALLEY LINE STUDY Contract No. PS-2415-3024-03

Appendix 2

Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios

Prepared for:

Los Angeles County

Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Prepared by:

444 South Flower Street

Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90071

February 15, 2019

Task 4 – Modeling of Service Scenarios

Date Initials

Originator 1-28-19 Tom L.

Checker 2-11-19 Lane F.

Back Checker 2-15-19 Tom L./ Salvador M.

Format Checker 2-15-19 Land F.

Approved by 2-15-19 Foster N.

Contents


Appendix 2 – Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios | i

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1-1

2 MODELING OF INITIAL SERVICE SCENARIOS ................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Data Sources and Methodology ............................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Modeling Results ...................................................................................................... 2-3

3 STAKEHOLDERS’ PRESENTATION AND FEEDBACK ....................................................... 3-1 3.1 Stakeholders’ Presentation ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Stakeholders’ Feedback ............................................................................................ 3-3

4 FIRST STAGE EVALUATION OF INITIAL SERVICE SCENARIOS ...................................... 4-5 4.1 Evaluation Factors and Methodology ...................................................................... 4-5 4.2 Evaluation Results .................................................................................................. 4-10

5 REVISED SERVICE SCENARIOS .......................................................................................... 5-2 5.1 Revised Scenario Service Levels and Patterns ......................................................... 5-2 5.2 Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimating Methodology ................................ 5-4 5.3 Incremental Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimates .................................... 5-7

6 NEXT STEPS ....................................................................................................................... 6-10 6.1 Refinement of Service Scenarios ............................................................................ 6-10 6.2 Second Stage Evaluation ........................................................................................ 6-10 6.3 Final Report ............................................................................................................. 6-10

7 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................. 7-11

Tables

Table 2-1: Antelope Valley Line Estimated Net Increase in Annual Operating Costs of the Initial Five Scenarios ....................................................................................................... 2-4

Table 2-2: Antelope Valley Line Total Estimated Capital Costs of the Initial Five Scenarios ................................................................................................................................ 2-5

Table 4-1: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Overall Weight .................................................... 4-5 Table 4-2: Operations Sub-categories and Methodology ........................................................... 4-6 Table 4-3: Regional Connectivity Sub-categories and Methodology .......................................... 4-7 Table 4-4: Costs and Financial Performance Sub-categories and Methodology ....................... 4-7 Table 4-5: ROW Impacts Sub-categories and Methodology ....................................................... 4-8 Table 4-6: Applied Technology Sub-categories and Methodology ............................................. 4-8 Table 4-7: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories Possible Weights and Scores .................................... 4-9 Table 4-8: Stage 1 Evaluation Overall Score .............................................................................. 4-11 Table 4-9: Summary of Sub-category’s Scores, Overall Scores and Final Service

Scenarios Scores .................................................................................................................. 4-12 Table 4-10: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Sensitivity Analysis Overall Weights ................ 4-1 Table 4-11: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Sensitivity Analysis Overall Scores .................. 4-1 Table 5-1: Revised AVL Service Scenarios based on Stakeholder and Metro Feedback ........... 5-2

Acronyms and Abbreviations


ii | Appendix 2 – Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios

Table 5-2: AVL Estimated Net Increase in Annual Operating Costs of the Revised Scenarios, Including Weekday and Weekend Service Improvements ................................. 5-3

Table 5-3: Unit Costs for Operations and Maintenance, Method #1 ....................................... 5-5 Table 5-4: Calculation of Operations and Maintenance Cost per Service Hour for

“High-End” Cost Range, Method #2 .................................................................................... 5-6 Table 5-5: Round Trips per Day, by Scenario ............................................................................. 5-7 Table 5-6: Late Evening Round Trips, by Scenario ..................................................................... 5-7 Table 5-7: Operating Days per Year ............................................................................................ 5-7 Table 5-8: Annual Round Trips and Revenue Hours .................................................................. 5-8 Table 5-9: Incremental Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs Compared to

Existing AVL Service (Millions of 2018 dollars) .................................................................... 5-8 Table 5-10: Round Trips per Day, at Reduced Service Levels for Scenarios 3-6 ....................... 5-9 Table 5-11: Incremental Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs at Reduced

Service Levels for Scenarios 3-6 Compared to Existing AVL Service (Millions of 2018 dollars) .......................................................................................................................... 5-9

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AVL Antelope Valley Line

Metro Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

MRP Metrolink Rehabilitation Plan

PRE Pacific Railway Enterprises

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

ROM Rough-order-of-Magnitude

ROW Right-of-way

1 Introduction


Appendix 2 – Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios | 1-1

1 INTRODUCTION

Task 4 of the Antelope Valley Line (AVL) study encompasses two major elements. First, a sketch planning analysis of alternative rail service scenarios for the AVL was undertaken using the Viriato1 rail network planning tool, with initial network and train performance data provided by Metrolink. The initial scenarios were based on both local and express service patterns, operating at hourly or 30-minute headways. The analysis determined the infrastructure improvements that would be required to support the improved service levels for each scenario. This modeling looks at the feasibility of improved service without capacity improvements (Task 4.1 – the Baseline Scenario) and the service improvements that are possible with increased capacity on the line (Task 4.2), identifying the specific required capital projects.

The second element of Task 4 consists of the first stage of a two-stage evaluation process. The first stage evaluation uses five key evaluation categories and multiple sub-criteria (defined in Task 3) to evaluate the performance of the service scenarios identified through the modeling, and scores the scenarios based on specific adopted criteria.

This Technical Memorandum reviews the methodology and findings for both major elements, reviews Stakeholder and Metro input on the results, and identifies revised service scenarios for further modeling and Stage 2 evaluation.

1 Viriato is an integrated timetable planning tool that allows users to optimize railway operational and capital planning, marketed by sma+. See https://www.sma-partner.com/images/Downloads/Viriato_E_160907.pdf

https://www.sma-partner.com/images/Downloads/Viriato_E_160907.pdf

2 Modeling of Initial Service Scenarios



2 MODELING OF INITIAL SERVICE SCENARIOS

2.1 Data Sources and Methodology

Metrolink provided the initial Viriato files developed to test hourly and 30-minute headways on the AVL. WSP utilized these files to test multiple service scenarios on the existing infrastructure and identify required capital improvements necessary to support each scenario.

Viriato produces “stringline” (i.e., time-distance) diagrams as output of the modeling process, which show where trains pass in a given service scenario, indicating locations where double-tracking or other capacity improvements will be required. Figure 2-1 displays an example of one such stringline.

Looking at Figure 2-1, the horizontal axis displays time, and the vertical axis displays locations along the AVL. The horizontal white bands represent locations which are currently double-tracked, and the gray bands represent single-track territory. The lines crisscrossing the chart are modeled trains moving along the line. Locations where the trains cross represent areas where double-track will be required. These have been further highlighted for emphasis in Figure 2-1, with green circles representing train meets in current double-track areas, and yellow and red circles representing areas where capacity increases will be required to support the proposed service schedule being tested. These latter locations correspond to specific capital projects identified for the line, named on the right side of the chart.

In this manner, WSP modeled a progressive series of service improvement levels to identify capital requirements. To answer the RFP Scope’s first question regarding what level of service can be supported by the existing infrastructure, an hourly, bi-directional, all-day service was tested as the first scenario. That modeling effort determined that hourly, bi-directional clock-face service requires one new capital project, at a minimum, to be feasible. That project is a siding extension just south of Tunnel 25, and is one of the projects identified in the sample stringline in Figure 2-1.

WSP tested a total of five separate service scenarios during this initial modeling effort, which were as follows:

1. Scenario 1: Hourly bi-directional service only 2. Scenario 2: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back 3. Scenario 3: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back,

full-length express service, and bunched outer-zone trains 4. Scenario 4: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back,

full-length express service, and spread-out outer-zone trains 5. Scenario 5: Same as (4), with intermediate turns at Sylmar instead of

Vista Canyon



2-2 | Appendix 2 – Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios

Figure 2-1: Sample Stringline Output from Viriato




Each of these scenarios were modeled, and stringlines were prepared which identified locations where double tracking would be needed for train meets or additional infrastructure (station improvements, train storage areas) would be needed to support each scenario. In the case of additional double tracking, the general locations and estimated lengths of the passing track segments were identified, based on a goal to provide reliable service under the scenario. The required extent of double tracking was estimated conservatively, in recognition of the uncertainties that exist at this high level of preliminary planning, as well as to account for potential future rolling stock choices that could result in equipment with different performance characteristics operating on the AVL.

2.2 Modeling Results

The modeling results from this effort indicated increasing levels of capital investment are required for the progressively increasing levels of service. The output from Viriato were used to develop draft AVL service timetables (“headway sheets”) and these were input into Task 5’s Infrastructure Improvements conceptual engineering and Task 6’s Conceptual Cost Estimates.

2.2.1 Identified Service Scenarios, Headway Sheets, and Operating Costs

Headway sheets (i.e., hypothetical timetables) for each of the five tested scenarios were developed directly from the Viriato stringlines in order to provide a familiar schedule format and display and are contained in the Attachment 1. Each succeeding scenario provides “slots” each hour for hourly full-line service, hourly short-turn service between Los Angeles Union Station and Via Princessa, and/or hourly full-line express service. For the short-turn and express service, only peak-period slots were filled with proposed scheduled trains, leaving mid-day slots available to accommodate additional service if desired, High-Speed Rail service, and/or UPRR freight service.

In addition to providing timetables for each scenario, the headway sheets were also utilized to calculate the net increase in train operating hours and trips, which have a direct bearing on the increased operating and maintenance costs. The trips in the headway sheets were also “blocked” (i.e., assigned to hypothetical train consists) to determine train consist requirements and train storage requirements at the Lancaster end of the line.

The operations and maintenance costs were estimated based on the net increase in annualized train service hours multiplied by Metrolink’s Train Operations Cost per Service Hour, calculated from SCRRA’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY 2017 (the latest available). Table 2-1 provides the estimated net increase in annual weekday operations and maintenance costs for each of the five modeled scenarios, over and above existing weekday service levels. As shown in Table 2-1, the increased service scenarios add between $3.1 million and $9.4 million in increased operations and maintenance costs, in proportion to the increase in service hours.




Table 2-1: Antelope Valley Line Estimated Net Increase in Annual Operating Costs of the Initial Five Scenarios

2.2.2 Identified Capital Improvements Required for Service Scenarios

In addition to the increased annual operating costs, the service scenarios require a successively larger number of capital projects to increase line capacity, thereby successively increasing capital costs. Following Task 5’s Conceptual Engineering effort, as part of Task 6, Rough-Order-of-Magnitude capital costs were estimated for each of the capital projects identified in the modeling effort. Table 2-2 identifies the specific capital projects, their individual costs, and their combined costs by service scenario. For example, Scenario 1 requires just one capital project at an estimated cost of $41.8 million. Scenario 2 requires four capital projects at a combined total estimated cost of $175.2 million. Scenario 5 requires eight separate capital projects at a combined total estimated cost of $425.8 million.

Scenario Estimated Net Increase in Annual Weekday Operating

and Maintenance Cost*Scenario 1: Hourly bi-directional service only $3.1 MScenario 2: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back $5.4 MScenario 3: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back, full-length express service, and bunched outer-zone trains $9.3 MScenario 4: Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back, full-length express service, and spread-out outer-zone trains $9.3 MScenario 5: Same as (4), with intermediate turns at Sylmar instead of Vista Canyon $9.4 M*Calculated based on Net Increase in Train Operating Hours over Existing Weekday Service Level multiplied by Metrolink FY 2017 Train Operations per Service Hour Cost




Table 2-2: Antelope Valley Line Total Estimated Capital Costs of the Initial Five Scenarios

Notes: 1. ROM Cost Estimate per RSE Antelope Valley CIP Project Cost Estimates, and PRE ROM Cost Estimates for Signal-Related work

2. All Costs include 35% Contingency on top of Base Construction Cost, and 60% Soft Cost rate added to Base Construction Costs AND Contingency.

Capital Projects and CostsMP Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Location Hourly Only30-60

No Express3-Hourly Patterns

3-Hourly Patterns

3-Hourly Patterns

ROM Cost Est. for Project1,2

-76.6Lancaster Terminal -- 6 trainsets

3,440 New double track and second station platform face, plus two new 1,000' storage tracks

X X27,300,000$

-76.6Lancaster Terminal -- 8 trainsets

4,300 New double track and second station platform face, plus three new 1,000' storage tracks

X X30,100,000$

68.5-72.0 Palmdale North 18,480 New double track and 2 platform tracks at station (integrated with HSR)

X X127,300,000$

55.0-57.5 Acton Siding 13,200 New siding X 40,200,000$

50.0-52.5 Ravenna South 13,200 Extend existing siding (new double track) X X56,300,000$

37.5-38.6 Via Princessa-Honby 5,808 Extend existing siding (new double track) X26,400,000$

33.4-35.0 Canyon-Sta. Clarita 8,448 Extend existing siding (new double track) X X X X48,800,000$

30.2-32.4 Hood-Saugus 11,616 Connect sidings and convert to double track

X41,600,000$

25.3-26.5 Balboa-Tunnel 6,336 Extend double track X X X X X 41,800,000$ 21.9-23.6 Sylmar-Roxford 8,976 New double track X 42,700,000$

21.5-22.1 Sylmar Station 3,168 Second track at station (Costs included in Van Nuys - Sylmar)

X22,900,000$

19.5-21.9 Van Nuys Blvd-Sylmar 12,672 New double track 47,400,000$ 17.0-19.5 Sheldon-Van Nuys Blvd 13,200 New double track X X 67,000,000$

12.7-15.6 Brighton-McGinley 15,312 Extend and connect double track sections X X X X57,300,000$

$ 41,800,000 $ 175,200,000 $ 328,900,000 $ 428,600,000 $ 448,700,000 677,100,000$ Total ROM Capital Cost

Scenario

Project Track-feet Description

3 Stakeholders’ Presentation and Feedback



3 STAKEHOLDERS’ PRESENTATION AND FEEDBACK

3.1 Stakeholders’ Presentation

The initial five modeled service scenarios were presented to the AVL Project Stakeholders on December 12, 2018. The PowerPoint presentation made to the group is included in its entirety in Attachment 3. The following graphs were provided to illustrate each scenario, along with a summary explanation.

3.1.1 Existing Service

Existing service does not provide clock-face headways, and there are gaps during the day when no trains depart in either direction for an hour. The Antelope Valley stations receive a lower level of service than the San Fernando and Santa Clarita Valley Stations.

3.1.2 Scenario 1 – Hourly Bi-Directional Service Only

Scenario 1 provides an even hourly bi-directional headway all day, with even service levels to all stations. However, no peak period increased frequency or express service is provided. Compared to existing service, the Antelope Valley sees a significant service improvement. One capital project is required for this scenario at an estimated cost of $41.8 million.




3.1.3 Scenario 2 – 30 minute/60 minute patterns

Scenario 2 starts with the hourly bi-directional all-day service and overlays partial-corridor trips from LAUS to Via Princessa hourly, to provide a total of 30 minute headways during peak periods on the inner portion and hourly on the outer portion of the line.2 This scenario requires four capital projects at an estimated total cost of $175.2 million.

3.1.4 Scenario 3 – Three hourly Patterns

This scenario builds on Scenario 2 by adding hourly express service during the peak periods, for a total of three hourly patterns during the peak. This scenario requires eight capital projects at an estimated total capital cost of $328.9 million.

3.1.5 Scenario 4 – Three Hourly Patterns (improved spacing between trains in Antelope Valley)

This scenario is similar to Scenario 3 but provides better spacing between express and local trains in the Antelope Valley. A total of seven capital projects are required at an estimated total cost of $428.6 million.

2 Inner portion of the line includes the San Fernando and Santa Clarita Valleys. The outer portion of the line includes Soledad Canyon and the Antelope Valley.




3.1.6 Scenario 5 – Three Hourly Patterns (short-turn trains terminate at Sylmar instead of Via Princessa)

This scenario is similar to Scenario 4 but turns the partial-corridor trips at Sylmar instead of Via Princessa, in order to reduce congestion and potential delays caused by the single-track Tunnel 25 segment. This scenario requires eight capital projects with an estimated total cost of $448.7 million.

3.2 Stakeholders’ Feedback

Valuable comments and input were received from the Stakeholders and Metro staff in response to the Stakeholder Presentation which helped shape revised service scenarios. This input included:

• The scenarios should be viewed as an incremental service improvement continuum, rather than any one scenario being an end-all objective.

• There was a strong desire to achieve some level of service improvement as soon as possible, with the knowledge that the more substantial service increases will take longer to implement.

• There was a strong desire to maintain the existing peak period frequency of service, albeit without clock-face headways initially. Given the substantial capital cost involved in operating the full-corridor local, short-turn local, and express service all on clock-face headways, and the lengthy time-period it would take to fund the projects in




Scenarios 3, 4, and 5, it was preferred to strive for earlier improvements to the existing service, with the higher-numbered scenarios serving as potential longer-term goals.

• There was a strong desire expressed for late-night service on weeknights and Saturdays, centering on departures at 10:30PM and 11:30 PM from LAUS.

• Clock-face hourly service would be a good goal for weekday mid-day periods, to the extent near-term capital funding for the Balboa siding extension project is sufficient to enable that service level.

• Hourly Saturday service, and bi-hourly Sunday service, on clock-face headways, would also be good near-term goals. Bi-hourly clock-face weekend service is feasible with the existing infrastructure, but hourly weekend service requires the Balboa siding extension near Tunnel 25 to be completed.

4 First Stage Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios



4 FIRST STAGE EVALUATION OF INITIAL SERVICE SCENARIOS

4.1 Evaluation Factors and Methodology

The evaluation and prioritization criteria for the Stage 1 evaluation were defined in Task 3. The Stage 1 evaluation uses five key evaluation categories and multiple sub-criteria to evaluate the performance of the initially-modeled service scenarios described in Section 2.1, and scores the scenarios based on the criteria (Table 4-7 shows the ranges of the sub-category’s weight, score, weighted score and overall possible score). The Stage 2 evaluation is planned to be done as part of Task 7, and the sub-criteria will be refocused to evaluate each package of capital projects needed for a specific level of service improvement.

4.1.1 Evaluation Criteria Categories and Sub-Criteria

The Stage 1 evaluation is a high-level service level improvement evaluation that takes into consideration the overall proposed service level increments of each initially-modeled service scenario. Service options which do not meet basic service needs or require excessive infrastructure improvements to implement, will score lower against the sub-criteria of each of the five evaluation categories. The five evaluation categories and corresponding sub-categories in the Stage 1 evaluation were derived from an original list of eight categories, which were refined during a series of reviews and discussions with Metro staff. The evaluation categories have a proposed overall category weight, and sub-category weights assigned as part of each individual criterion. These subcategory weighted scores were added, and then multiplied by the overall category percentage to arrive at a numeric evaluation score for that category. The five key evaluation categories and corresponding overall weights are shown in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Overall Weight

Category Number Category

Overall Category Weight

1 Operations 35%

2 Regional Connectivity 25%

3 Costs and Financial Performance 20%

4 ROW Impacts 10%

5 Applied Technology 10%

Table 4-2 through Table 4-6 present the sub-categories in each of the five evaluation categories, and their corresponding metric/measure and evaluation methodology. Table 4-7 provides Evaluation Categories Maximum Possible Weights and Scores for each of the sub-criteria.




Table 4-2: Operations Sub-categories and Methodology

Category Evaluation Criteria Metric/Measure Methodology

Operations

Capacity Improvement

Percent increase in trains The percent increase in trains is calculated from number of existing trains per day, compared to the number of trains in each of the five scenarios

Travel Time Improvement

Average percent reduction in overall train trip time (wait time plus on-board time)

The percent reduction in overall train trip time is calculated by dividing the total travel time savings of each of the five scenarios, by the existing service’s total travel time. Travel time savings is estimated with the formula below:

[Existing condition average trip time (in vehicle full length trips only) + Average wait time between vehicles] - [Scenario’s average trip time in vehicle (full-length trips only) + average wait time between vehicles (all trips all stops)]

Compatibility with Local Transit and Development Plans

Consistency with plans for future transit networks, route, and station area development plans

The compatibility with local transit and development plans is determined with the number of plans within the catchment area of each AVL stations, and with the number of new train stops per station of each new scenario. These two factors are used to create a measure to see how these projects will impact each scenario

Flexibility for Future Growth in Long Term

Assessment of support for long-term service level increases

Flexibility to support future growth was evaluated on the scenario's ability to support long-term service increases with more infrastructure, transfers or coordination with future services like California High-Speed Rail, High Desert Corridor rail service, and East San Fernando Valley light rail, and its flexibility to develop service around the constraints of Tunnel 25

Quality of the Passenger Experience

General assessment of the overall improvement in service frequency, multi-modal connectivity, amenities, on-time performance

Improvement to the quality of the passenger’s experience was evaluated with the scenario’s percent increase in service frequency, compared to the existing service. More frequent service increases connectivity and the sense of on-time service

Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns

Pass/fail assessment based on service plan slot schedule

Compatibility with service plan slot schedule patterns is evaluated based on the five service scenarios’ number of train stops in intervals of 60, 30 or 15 minutes (+/- 2 minutes) between trains at AVL stations




Table 4-3: Regional Connectivity Sub-categories and Methodology


Regional Connectivity

Travel Markets Served

Percent increase in number of train trip stops at AVL stations (or station pairs)

The percent increase in the number of train trip stops at AVL stations is calculated from the five service scenarios’ timetables, compared to the current number of trains stops identified in the existing timetable

Multimodal Connectivity

Headway/Travel Pattern synchs or can be made to synch with local transit operators

Multimodal connectivity is measured with the number of existing bus lines providing service in intervals of 60, 30, 15 or 10 minutes to AVL Stations during peak periods. These existing bus lines from L.A. Metro, AVTA, and Santa Clarita Transit were multiplied by the number of additional train trips stops at AVL stations of each of the five service scenarios

Regional Network Connectivity

Headway/trip pattern synchs with SCORE program connections in LAUS, Palmdale, Burbank Airport North

The ability of the scenarios’ headways to provide better synchronization with the regional network was determined with the number of trains with intervals of 30 minutes or less (All five initial service scenarios start with a 60 minute base service)

Rail Mode Share Potential

Projected percent increase in corridor mode share

The projected rail mode share is determined by calculating the percent increase in daily revenue hours from the existing weekday service. This is then used to calculate the increase in mode share by applying a ratio of every 1% increase in daily revenue hours yields a 0.5% increase in

ridership3

Table 4-4: Costs and Financial Performance Sub-categories and Methodology


Costs and Financial Performance

Total Capital Cost

Rough-order-of-Magnitude (ROM) capital cost

ROW capital costs are determined from high-level engineering drawings using high-level cost factors for number of miles of double-track, bridges, culverts, signal systems, and other similar elements, required for each project

Relative Impact on Annual Operating Cost of AVL service

Percent increase in annual AVL operating cost

Percent increase in annual AVL operating cost is calculated based on percent increase in train miles compared to exciting operating costs.

3 Support for this approach is found in Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, Chapter 9 – Transit Scheduling and Frequency. Transportation Research Board, 2004.




Table 4-5: ROW Impacts Sub-categories and Methodology


ROW Impacts

Right-of-Way (ROW) takes

Extent of ROW acquisition required from UPRR or other ROW owners

ROW takes are calculated by measuring the total square feet of ROW acquisition required to implement the capital projects identified for each scenario. The capital projects’ footprints were identified for a high-level engineering exercise

Indirect Property (noise barriers, etc.)

Extent to which impacts to adjacent properties can be mitigated (i.e., with noise barriers, landscaping)

The extent of impacts to adjacent properties by the capital projects identified for each scenario, are determined with the capital projects’ footprint adjacent to sensitive land uses (residential, schools, etc.)

Sensitive Areas (historic, endangered species, etc.)

Extent to which proposed construction affects sensitive areas or communities

The extent of the impact to sensitive areas is determined with the number of drainage, bridges and earthwork projects required to implement the capital projects per scenario.

Table 4-6: Applied Technology Sub-categories and Methodology


Applied Technology

VMT Reduction Number of vehicular miles travelled reduced (1000's)

The potential reduction of vehicular miles travelled is estimated by multiplying the expected ridership increase by the average commuter rail trip length in the corridor. Expected ridership increase is calculated with the increase of daily revenue hours with the ratio of every 1% increase in daily revenue hours yielding a 0.5% increase in ridership. The average commuter rail trip length in miles for the AVL was provided by SCRRA

Clean Vehicle Technology (e.g., DMUs, Electrification)

Supports cleaner vehicle technology

The assessment of a scenario’s capability to support the use of clean vehicle technology was measured by the service capacity to accommodate the maximum load capacity of a cleaner vehicle. Maximum load capacity is calculated with the percent increase of daily revenue hours from the existing weekday service and projected maximum loads

Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail

Extent to which the service and infrastructure plan supports future development of HSR in the corridor

Support for the future development of HSR in the corridor was assessed with the scenario’s ability to improve service frequency, infrastructure and express service

Serves Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) and Low Income Households

Number of additional train stops serving stations near disadvantaged/low-income communities

The ability to serves DAC and Low Income Households/Communities was evaluated with the additional train stops per scenario, and number of disadvantaged/high poverty communities with a half-mile from these stations




Table 4-7: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories Possible Weights and Scores

No. Category Overall Category

Weight Evaluation Criteria Metric/Measure Type of Measure

Sub-Category Weight (Range)

Sub-Category Score

(Range)

Sub-Category Weighted Score

(Range)

Overall Category Score

(Maximum score)

1 Operations 35%

Capacity Improvement Percent increase in trains per hour or per day Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18

Travel Time Improvement Average percent reduction in overall train trip time (wait time plus on-board time) Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18


Consistency with plans for future transit networks, route, and station area development plans Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18

Flexibility for Future Growth in Long Term

Assessment of support for long-term service level increases Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18

Quality of the Passenger Experience

General assessment of the overall improvement in service frequency, multi-modal connectivity, amenities, on-time performance

Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18

Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns

Pass/fail assessment based on service plan slot schedule Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 18

2 Regional Connectivity

25%

Travel Markets Served Percent Increase in number of train trip stops at AVL stations (or station pairs) Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 19

Multimodal Connectivity Headway/Travel Pattern synchs or can be made to synch with local transit operators Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 19

Regional Network Connectivity Headway/trip pattern synchs with SCORE program connections in LAUS, Palmdale, Burbank Airport North

Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 19

Rail Mode Share Potential Projected Percent Increase in corridor mode share Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 19

3 Costs and Financial Performance

20%

Total Capital Cost ROM Capital cost using high-level cost factors for # of miles of double-track, bridges, etc. Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 30


Percent increase in annual AVL operating cost based on % increase in train miles Qualitative in First Stage

1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 30

4 ROW Impacts 10%

Right-of-Way Takes Extent of ROW acquisition required from UPRR or other ROW owners Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 10

Indirect Property (noise barriers, etc.)


Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 10

Sensitive Areas (historic, endangered species, etc.)

Extent to which proposed construction affects sensitive areas or communities (including natural, cultural, and community resources

Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 10

5 Applied Technology 10%

VMT Reduction Number of vehicular miles travelled reduced (1000's) Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 8


Supports cleaner vehicle technology Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 8

Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail


Qualitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 8

Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities

Number of additional train stops serving stations near disadvantaged/low-income communities Quantitative 1 -3 100 - 300 100 - 300 8

Potential Final Score 300




4.2 Evaluation Results

The criteria for the Stage 1 Evaluation are intended to provide an evaluation of the overall performance and benefits of the service levels provided by each of the scenarios, as well as their costs and impacts. The five service scenarios presented in Section 2.1 were evaluated utilizing the metric and methodology for the five evaluation categories and corresponding sub-categories. For each sub-category, a score between 100 and 300 was assigned to each service scenario based on a predetermined score breakdown. This score between 100 and 300 was then weighted with the sub-category weight of 1, 2 or 3, and finally these subcategory weighted scores were added, and then multiplied by the overall category percentage to arrive at a numeric evaluation score for that category. The overall evaluation results are presented in this section, and Attachment 4 presents more detail tables of the evaluation.

4.2.1 Overall Evaluation Results of the Five Scenarios

The Stage 1 Evaluation is heavily focused on service level improvement, which is reflected by the 35% overall weight assigned to the Operations category. The evaluation resulted in service scenarios 3, 4 and 5 having a better performance for the Operations category with their semi-hourly bi-directional, full-length express and intermediate turn-back operations services. Service Scenario 1 with its hourly bi-directional service ranked the lowest for the Operations category. Service Scenario 5 scored the highest in all Operations sub-categories, except on compatibility with clock-face schedule patterns.

For the Regional Connectivity category, and its overall 25% overall weight, service Scenario 5 performed the best by offering a significant increase in the number of train trip stops, which help enhance synchronization to local and regional transit services, and allow for an increase in the regional rail’s corridor mode share. Service Scenarios 3 and 4 performed better than Scenarios 1 and 2 for the category.

The other important factor of this evaluation is the feasibility to implement the service scenario without requiring excessive infrastructure improvements. The Costs and Financial Performance category, with a 20% overall weight, was designed to gauge the impact of the capital and operating costs to implement these scenarios. Service Scenario 1 requiring only one capital project, and the least additional operations cost, performed the best in this category. As service Scenarios 3, 4 and 5 required more capital projects to provide greater levels of service, and greater operations cost associated with this service, they scored lowest in this category.

The sub-categories in the Right-of-Way Impacts category (with a 10% overall weight), evaluate the effects on adjacent property, and communities, to implement each service scenario. Service Scenarios 3, 4 and 5 scored the lowest in this category because they required capital projects that involve the acquisition of property, construction sites, and mitigation measures to be implemented. Service Scenario 1 scored the highest because it required only one capital project, which is not located near sensitive land uses.

The ability of a scenario to have a positive impact through the use of technology was evaluated with the Applied Technology category, which was assigned a 10% overall weight. Scenario 5 scored the highest for this category, with Scenarios 2, 3, and 4 scoring slightly lower, and Scenario 1 scoring the lowest. Scenario 5 provides more favorable service to disadvantaged communities, reduces vehicular miles travelled, and supports future development of HSR service and use of cleaner vehicles. Despite all five service scenarios providing some




opportunity to support the future development of HSR service, none of them address the requirement of electrifying the corridor, which is crucial for HSR service. A major impediment to this on the AVL line is the limited clearance height of Tunnel 25, which is insufficient to allow installation of electric catenary lines.

The Stage 1 evaluation results show Scenario 5 with an overall score 238 out of a possible score of 300. Scenario 3 has the second highest overall score with 225, followed by Scenario 4 with an overall score of 219. The lowest overall scores from this evaluation are for Scenario 1 with a score of 184, and Scenario 2 with a score of 204. This evaluation shows that Scenario 5 has the highest ability to meet the criteria which measure the performance and benefits of enhanced service for the AVL. Table 4-8 summarizes the final overall score of the Stage 1 evaluation, and Table 4-9 presents the sub-category scores, overall score and final score out of 300 for each of the five scenarios. More detailed tables of the evaluation of each of the sub-categories are presented in Attachment 4.

Table 4-8: Stage 1 Evaluation Overall Score

Stage 1 Evaluation Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Overall Score (Out of 300) 184 204 225 219 238




Table 4-9: Summary of Sub-category’s Scores, Overall Scores and Final Service Scenarios Scores

No. Category Evaluation Criteria

Sub-Category Score

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Possible Overall Category Score Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

1 Operations

Capacity Improvement 100 - 300 100 100 250 250 300 18 6 6 15 15 18

Travel Time Improvement 100 - 300 200 250 300 300 300 18 12 15 18 18 18

Compatibility with Local Transit and Development Plans 100 - 300 100 200 300 300 300 18 6 12 18 18 18

Flexibility for Future Growth in Long Term 100 - 300 200 200 300 300 300 18 12 12 18 18 18

Quality of the Passenger Experience 100 - 300 100 100 200 200 300 18 6 6 12 12 18

Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns 100 - 300 150 300 250 200 150 18 9 18 15 12 9


Travel Markets Served 100 - 300 100 200 250 250 300 19 6 13 16 16 19

Multimodal Connectivity 100 - 300 100 150 250 250 300 19 6 9 16 16 19

Regional Network Connectivity 100 - 300 100 200 300 300 300 19 6 13 19 19 19

Rail Mode Share Potential 100 - 300 150 200 300 250 300 19 9 13 19 16 19


Total Capital Cost 100 - 300 300 200 100 100 100 30 30 20 10 10 10

Relative Impact on Annual Operating Cost of AVL service 100 - 300 300 250 100 100 100 30 30 25 10 10 10

4 ROW Impacts

Right-of-Way Takes 100 - 300 300 200 200 100 100 10 10 7 7 3 3

Indirect Property (noise barriers, etc.) 100 - 300 300 300 100 300 300 10 10 10 3 10 10

Sensitive Areas (historic, endangered species, etc.) 100 - 300 300 200 200 100 100 10 10 7 7 3 3

5 Applied Technology

VMT Reduction 100 - 300 100 150 300 300 300 8 3 4 8 8 8

Clean Vehicle Technology (e.g., DMUs, Electrification) 100 - 300 300 300 300 300 300 8 8 8 8 8 8

Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail 100 - 300 100 200 200 200 300 8 3 5 5 5 8

Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities 100 - 300 150 200 250 250 300 8 4 5 6 6 8

Final Score (Out of 300) 184 204 225 219 238




4.2.2 Sensitivity Analysis Findings

The Stage 1 evaluation shows that Scenario 5 has the highest capability to increase service for the AVL. However, implementing this scenario requires an excessive amount of infrastructure improvement and increased annual operating cost which make the scenario less feasible to implement. The results made it apparent that the evaluation criteria were heavily weighted toward the benefits of service improvements, vs. the costs.

Accordingly, after the Stage 1 evaluation was completed, a sensitivity analysis was performed on the overall category weights to see what combination of weights result in service scenarios that required excessive infrastructure improvements being less feasible (to have a lower overall score), when compared to service scenarios that don’t require excessive infrastructure improvements. By increasing the overall weight of the Costs and Financial Performance category from 20% to 40%, and reducing the overall weight for the Operations and Regional Connectivity categories from 35% to 25% and from 25% to 20% respectively, service Scenarios 1 and 2, which require the least infrastructure improvements, resulted in the highest evaluation overall scores. Table 4-10 shows the Stage 1 evaluation categories and sensitivity analysis overall weights, and Table 4-11 displays how the overall scores of the five service scenarios compare with the different weights.

Table 4-10: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Sensitivity Analysis Overall Weights


Overall Category Weight Sensitivity Analysis Overall Category Weight

1 Operations 35% 25%

2 Regional Connectivity 25% 20%

3 Costs and Financial Performance 20% 40%

4 ROW Impacts 10% 10%

5 Applied Technology 10% 10%

Table 4-11: Stage 1 Evaluation Categories and Sensitivity Analysis Overall Scores

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Stage 1 Evaluation Overall Score 184 204 225 219 238

Sensitivity Analysis Overall Score 224 220 205 200 215

4.2.3 Evaluation Conclusions

Based on the evaluation findings and sensitivity analysis, it has become clear that improvements to service on the AVL (and the capital projects needed to support those improvements) should be viewed as an incremental service improvement continuum as funding permits, rather than any one scenario being an end-all objective. This was also one of the key messages coming out of the discussion of the service scenarios with Stakeholders on December 12, 2018, and will help shape study recommendations going forward.

5 Revised Service Scenarios



5 REVISED SERVICE SCENARIOS

5.1 Revised Scenario Service Levels and Patterns

After consideration of Stakeholder input and consultation with Metro staff, the study team identified six revised scenarios (hereinafter referred to as “Revised Scenarios” for clarity) for further modeling and evaluation during the Stage 2 evaluation process, as displayed in Table 5-1. These scenarios include near-term scenarios that offer service increases without any capital projects (Revised Scenario 1) or with just one capital project (Revised Scenario 2). All scenarios offer late night service Monday through Saturday, and strive for hourly clock-face mid-day service beginning with Revised Scenario 2. Revised Scenarios 3 through 6 offer longer term service level objectives to strive for as capital and operating funding to support them becomes available.

Table 5-1: Revised AVL Service Scenarios based on Stakeholder and Metro Feedback

Scenario Peak Service Late Night Assumption

Off-Peak Assumption

Weekend Assumption

Capital Impact over Baseline

Revised Scenario 1:Late Evening Trip

Existing Peak service 1 late night trip LAUS - LAN

Current schedule Current Schedule plus 1 Late Night Trip Saturday

None

Revised Scenario 2:Two Additional Off-Peak Round Trips

Existing Peak service 1 late night trip LAUS - LAN

Inbound: Two additional mid-day trips;Outbound: Two additional mid-day trips or one mid-day and one additional late night trip

Hourly Saturday, bi-hourly Sunday, with one late evening trip on Saturday

Requires Balboa Siding Extension totaling $41.8 million

Revised Scenario 3:Improved Peak Service and Semi-Hourly Off-Peak Service

Existing Peak service with modest improvements

2 late night trips LAUS - LAN

30-minute mid-day on inner portion of the line LAUS to Vista Canyon, hourly out to Lancaster

Hourly Saturday, bi-hourly Sunday, with two late evening trips on Saturday

Requires Balboa Siding Extension and three additional capital projects totaling $175.2 million

Revised Scenario 4: Three Patterns: Semi-hourly plus express service

Three hourly patterns - full-corridor local, short-turn local, and Express, all on clockface headways




Requires eight capital projects totaling $328.9 million

Revised Scenario 5:Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Santa Clarita





Requires seven capital projects totaling $428.6 million

Revised Scenario 6:Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Sylmar





Requires eight capital projects totaling $448.7 million




Headway Sheets were developed for the six revised scenarios and are included in Attachment 5. The Revised Scenarios are intended to be “layered”, with successively increasing service levels with each higher-numbered scenario. Examination of the headway sheets shows a significant improvement in service levels in Revised Scenarios 2 through 6, particularly in the mid-day period.

The estimated net increase in annual operating cost that results from the Revised Scenarios is displayed in Table 5-2. The annualized operating cost increases for the higher-numbered Revised Scenarios are much larger than for the originally modeled scenarios due to significantly larger service increases, including filling in the mid-day schedules with short-turn trips between LAUS and Via Princessa or Sylmar. Those operating costs should be considered as the upper bounds in costs, with the likelihood that mid-day service would be gradually increased as demand grows over time.

It should be noted that the evaluation of the service scenarios (reviewed in Section 4 of this report) is based on the initially-modeled service scenarios, not the Revised Scenarios that resulted from the Stakeholder and Metro input. The evaluation of the Revised Scenarios will be addressed in Task 7, Evaluation of Alternatives.

Table 5-2: AVL Estimated Net Increase in Annual Operating Costs of the Revised Scenarios, Including Weekday and Weekend Service Improvements

Service Option

Weekday Base

Increase

Weekday Night

Increase

Saturday Base

Increase

Saturday Night

Increase

Sunday Base

Increase

Sunday Night

Increase TOTALRevised Scenario 1:Late Evening Trip -$ 2,306,327$ -$ 432,899$ -$ -$ 2,739,226$


5,792,027$ 2,306,327$ 2,907,370$ 432,899$ 345,744$ -$ 11,784,367$

Revised Scenario 3:Improved Peak Service and Semi-Hourly Off-Peak Service

21,066,205$ 4,492,097$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 29,677,214$

Revised Scenario 4: Three Patterns: Semi-hourly plus express service

28,829,094$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 37,277,611$

Revised Scenario 5:Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Santa Clarita

29,615,342$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 38,063,859$

Revised Scenario 6:Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Sylmar

22,093,569$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 30,542,087$

*Please refer to Scenario Descriptions for Assumptions




5.2 Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimating Methodology Increasing the number of Metrolink trains operating on the AVL will increase costs for operations and maintenance. These costs will be partially offset by fare revenues generated from increased ridership. Estimates of annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs for Metrolink service on the AVL were prepared for six rail service scenarios. These estimates consider the expected incremental cost associated with increasing train service, over and above the cost of delivering the existing AVL service. The incremental costs are primarily associated with train crews and train operations, fuel, and rolling stock maintenance.

Two different methods were used, to generate a range of estimated incremental costs for each service scenario. Using a range of costs reflects the underlying uncertainty of estimating costs in the early phase of planning, uncertainties about how operations and maintenance will be contracted by Metrolink in the future, and uncertainties about how operational characteristics will change in the future as service grows.

The two methods were:

(1) Estimates of costs for diesel fuel, train crews and equipment maintenance based on operations data, using unit cost factors derived by Metrolink, similar to a method used in a recent Metrolink study of the San Bernardino Line

(2) Estimate of incremental cost based on incremental change in the level of revenue service hours, using high-level unit costs per service hour derived from cost line items presented in Metrolink’s budgets and comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs), deemed to represent costs that vary based on the level of service provided

The second method generated incremental costs that were higher than the first method for all scenarios. With the high-level factoring approach used in the second method, it can be difficult to separate elements of fixed costs from purely variable costs, which may be one reason the estimates using this method resulted in relatively higher costs.

The first method produces estimates closer to what Metrolink would expect in terms of the incremental cost of adding trains to an existing line. Metrolink, however, is in the process of changing the way it contracts for its operations, moving towards a single contract covering all operations and maintenance activities. This will affect how Metrolink estimates operations cost in the future, and could move the incremental cost per hour closer to the high-end range figure.

The main volume of the AVL Study final report includes only the low end of the range of O&M cost estimates, so as not to imply a commitment to funding operations larger than what may be needed or supportable. Presenting only a single value, and acknowledging that funding has not yet been identified, simplifies the presentation of initial study results. More detailed analysis of operations and O&M costs will be needed to support investment and funding decisions, and updated O&M cost estimates will be prepared based on those analyses.

For purposes of this high-level study of the AVL, the two methods generate a reasonable low-to-high range of incremental costs that can be used for evaluating the cost-effectiveness and financial feasibility of increasing service according to any of the six scenarios that were analyzed.

5.2.1 Methodology: Low End of Cost Range

The low end of the cost range was developed by applying unit cost factors to service quantities derived from the service plans for each scenario. The cost categories and cost drivers included:

• Diesel fuel, based on train-miles




• Other transportation costs, based on the number of train crews utilized, with different cost factors for crews that operate on a regular shift versus those that operate on a split shift (with mid-day layover period)

• Rolling stock maintenance, based on the number of revenue train sets in operation on the line

Unit costs were provided by Metrolink based on historical experience. The unit costs for each cost driver are shown in Table 5-3. Train-miles are taken directly from the scenario timetables. The number of required train crews also was derived from the timetables, making reasonable assumptions about crew assignments, layovers and overtime. A contingency of 20 percent was applied to the total incremental O&M cost to reflect elements of variable cost not included in the estimates generated by the four primary cost drivers.

Table 5-3: Unit Costs for Operations and Maintenance, Method #1

Cost Driver Unit Cost

Fuel $6.75 per train-mile

Train crew – straight shift $1,752 per crew per day

Train crew – split shift $2,134 per crew per day

Equipment maintenance $2,000 per revenue trainset per day

Source: SCRRA

5.2.2 Methodology: High End of Cost Range

To develop the high-end of the cost estimate range, WSP obtained a line-item budget for “Operations & Services” and “Administration & Services” from the Southern California Regional Rail Authority Fiscal Year 2018-19 Adopted Budget. That line item budget is provided in Exhibit 3.6, page 41 of the Adopted Budget.

WSP then recreated that line item budget, for FY18-19, in Table 5-2 below. As shown in Table 2, the total of Operations and Administration Services for FY18-19 is $193.2 million. When that number is divided into the estimated 84,838 Estimated Service Hours (based on the FY18 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, page 65), the resulting unit cost figure is $2,278 per revenue service hour.

Next, the team used the concept of “fixed” vs. “variable” costs to identify only those cost categories that mostly vary with the amount of service provided. Under this approach, costs which are fixed or not directly related to the quantity of train service are assumed to not vary with service levels and were therefore excluded from the calculation of incremental costs. After excluding the mostly fixed costs, and also excluding all Administration costs (which are assumed to be fixed regardless of relatively minor changes in overall service levels), the resulting unit cost figure was $1,232 per revenue service hour, as shown in the second column of Table 5-4. This unit cost was applied to each of the service scenarios developed for the AVL study to arrive at an estimated incremental increase in operating and maintenance cost for each scenario, over existing service levels.




Table 5-4: Calculation of Operations and Maintenance Cost per Service Hour for “High-End” Cost Range, Method #2

Source: SCRRA FY2018-19 Operating Budget

Antelope Valley StudyEstimated Cost Allocation per Service HourMetrolink FY 2018-19 Operating Budget

Cost Category (000's) FY 18-19 Budget

Include in Refined Op Cost/Service

Hour? (Y/N) Refined Op Cost CommentOperations & Services

Train Operations $46,872 Y $46,872Equipment Maintenance $38,133 Y $38,133Contingency (Train Ops)Fuel $18,744 Y $18,744Non-Scheduled Rolling Stock Repairs $260 Y $260Operating Facilities Maintenance $1,684 Fixed costOther Operating Train Services $482 Y $482Rolling Stock Lease $336 Fixed costSecurity - Sheriff $5,889 Y $0Security - Guards $2,450 Y $0Supplemental Additional Security $690 Y $0Public Safety Program $389 Fixed costPassenger Relations $1,732 Fixed costHoliday Trains - - - - - - N/ATVM Maintenance/Revenue Collection $9,055 Fixed costMarketing $5,380 Fixed costMedia & External Communications $458 Fixed costUtilities/Leases $3,473 Fixed cost

Transfers to Other Operators $6,496

Assumes this is reimbursement to other Operators for transfering pax as a reduction on revenue

Amtrak Transfers $2,400

Assumes this is reimbursement to other Operators for transfering pax as a reduction on revenue

Station Maintenance $1,806 Fixed costRail Agreements $5,400 Fixed costSubtotal Operations & Services $152,129 $104,491

Administration & ServicesOps Salaries & Fringe Benefits $13,782 All admin cost assumed to be fixed costsOps Non-Labor Expenses $7,635Indirect Administrative Expenses $17,096Ops Professional Services $2,579Subtotal Admin & Services $41,092 $0Contingency (Non-Train Ops)

Total Train Operating Expenses $193,221 $104,491

Total Estimated Service Hours for FY19 84,838 84,838

2,278$ 1,232$ Total Estimated Train Operating Cost per Service Hour




5.3 Incremental Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimates

5.3.1 Level of Service Inputs

The six service scenarios propose a series of incremental increases in weekday train service on the AVL. In order to derive estimates of annual O&M costs, assumptions were made about the level of service on weekends and holidays in all scenarios. In addition, the scenarios assume introduction of late evening service on different days of the week – either only on Friday and Saturday nights, or on Monday through Saturday nights. Service levels, therefore, were developed for Mondays-through-Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays/holidays.

Table 5-5 presents the number of daily round trip trains on each day of the week, for the existing service and the six scenarios. In Scenarios 1 and 2, existing weekend service is assumed to be retained (with the addition of a late-night train on Saturdays). Scenarios 3 through 6 assume weekend service is increased to hourly service on Saturdays and bi-hourly service on Sundays and holidays.

In Scenarios 1 and 2, a late evening round trip is added on Friday and Saturday nights. In Scenario 3, late night service is extended to all days of the week except Sundays and holidays. Scenarios 4, 5 and 6 add a second late evening train on Fridays and Saturdays, and the opportunity also exists to add this second train in Scenario 3. The assumed number of late evening trains, by day of the week, is shown in Table 5-6 for each scenario. Table 5-7 presents the number of days in a typical 365-day year falling into each day-of-week category.

Table 5-5: Round Trips per Day, by Scenario

Days Existing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6

Mon-Thu 15 15 17 29 35 35 35

Fri 15 16 18 29–301 36 36 36

Sat 6 7 7 14–151 15 15 15

Sun & Hol 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 1 Higher number reflects addition of a second late night train departing LAUS on Fridays and Saturdays after 11pm. Source: WSP

Table 5-6: Late Evening Round Trips, by Scenario


Mon-Thu -- -- -- 1 1 1 1

Fri -- 1 1 1–2 2 2 2

Sat -- 1 1 1–2 2 2 2

Sun & Hol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Source: WSP

Table 5-7: Operating Days per Year

Days Existing

Mon-Thu 203

Fri 52

Sat 52

Sun & Hol 58

Total 365 Source: WSP




The total quantity of annual service on the AVL is presented in Table 5-8 for each scenario. The total number of revenue round trips and total quantity of revenue service hours are compared with the existing AVL level of service.

Table 5-8: Annual Round Trips and Revenue Hours


Round Trips 4,485 4,589 5,099 8,5292 10,163 10,163 10,163

Revenue Hours 16,781 17,221 20,038 28,8232 32,948 33,330 29,671

2 Annual round trips and revenue hours for Scenario 3 based on one late night LAUS departure on Mondays through Saturdays. Source: WSP

5.3.2 Results

Applying the unit cost factors to the service quantities for each scenario, using each of the two costing methods discussed in Section 5, yields the range of incremental annual O&M costs shown in Table 5-9. Scenario 1, adding a late evening train on Fridays and Saturdays, is projected to increase O&M costs by $400,00 to $500,000 per year. Adding two additional daily off-peak round trips would increase annual costs by $3.3 to $4.0 million, compared with existing service. Scenario 3 dramatically increases the number of off-peak trains and marginally increases peak service, resulting in a relatively large increase in annual costs, between $10.8 and $14.8 million. Scenarios 4, 5 and 6 increase peak and reverse-peak service and would result in increased O&M costs in the range of $10 to $20 million per year.

Table 5-9: Incremental Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs Compared to Existing AVL Service (Millions of 2018 dollars)

Days Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6

Low Range $0.41 $3.30 $10.79 $14.37 $14.37 $10.29

High Range $0.54 $4.01 $14.83 $19.91 $20.38 $15.88

Note: Based on annual revenue hours. Assumes all scheduled Metrolink train slots are filled with revenue trains. Highlighted cells contain incremental O&M cost estimates used in the final report main volume. Source: WSP

The above comparison assumes that all of the scheduled AVL train slots identified in the service plan for each scenario are utilized by Metrolink trains. While that is feasible, and may be warranted by demand, it is not necessary for all slots to be filled, and a somewhat lower level of service might prove to be warranted based on demand and financial constraints. This also would provide slots that could be utilized for rail freight trains during off-peak periods in the future.

To illustrate the potential in Scenarios 3 through 6 for more modest O&M cost increases, with a more gradual increase in service, an alternative set of estimates was developed, making arbitrary assumptions about a reduced level of off-peak service. Scenarios 1 and 2 only propose modest increases in service over existing levels, so there would be no equivalent opportunity for reduced service in these scenarios. Table 5-10 presents a level of train service with two to three fewer weekday round trips, compared with the full service levels presented in Table 5-5. Table 5-11 shows the resulting reduction in annual round trips, annual revenue service hours, and incremental annual O&M costs, respectively.




Table 5-10: Round Trips per Day, at Reduced Service Levels for Scenarios 3-6

Days Existing Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6

Mon-Thu 15 26 33 33 33

Fri 15 26 34 34 34

Sat 6 12 13 13 13

Sun & Hol 6 7 7 7 7 Note: Assumes reduced level of service with 2-3 daily round trip slots not filled with trains. Source: WSP

Table 5-11: Incremental Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs at Reduced Service Levels for Scenarios 3-6 Compared to Existing AVL Service (Millions of 2018 dollars)

Days Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6

Incremental Round Trips 3,175 5,064 5,064 5,064

Incremental Revenue Hours 9,109 14,236 14,591 10,806

Incremental Annual O&M Cost

Low Range $6.23 $10.98 $10.98 $7.02

High Range $11.22 $17.53 $17.97 $13.31 Note: Assumes reduced level of service with 2-3 daily round trip slots not filled with trains. Compares with existing service with 4,485 annual round trips and 16,781 annual revenue service hours. Highlighted cells contain incremental O&M cost estimates used in the final report main volume. Source: WSP

6 Next Steps



6 NEXT STEPS

The following actions define the steps to be taken for the Antelope Valley Line Study subsequent to the definition of the six revised service scenarios.

6.1 Refinement of Service Scenarios

• The study team will present the Revised Scenarios to the AVL Study stakeholders on February 11, 2019 for their review and feedback, which will help shape final study recommendations.

• Reaching out to the public for feedback through a survey – As part of the December 12 meeting, it was decided to conduct an on-board survey of current riders to help determine preferences among specific near-term and longer-term service improvements contained in the Revised Scenarios. This will also help inform final study recommendations.

• Incorporate feedback from stakeholder and the public into the final report. – With completion of the February 11 Stakeholder meeting and the on-board survey, the study team will incorporate the additional input into the draft final report.

6.2 Second Stage Evaluation

The second stage evaluation will address specific project improvements at a more detailed level, to determine the most reasonable capital improvement projects to attain the desire service level improvements identified by Metro and the stakeholders. This second stage evaluation will be completed as part of Task 7.

6.3 Final Report

The final report will incorporate all work conducted for this study to produce a set of near-term and longer term recommendations. The technically-detailed Final Report and Appendices will be accompanied by an Executive Summary.

7 Attachments



7 ATTACHMENTS

1. Initially-Modeled Scenario Headway Sheets

2. Operations and Maintenance Cost Summaries

3. PowerPoint Presentation to Stakeholders, December 12, 2018

4. Evaluation Matrices for Service Scenario Evaluation

5. Revised Scenario Headway Sheets

7 Attachments



APPENDIX 2 – ATTACHMENT 1 Initially-Modeled Scenario Headway Sheets

EXISTING SERVICE

Inbound: Lancaster to L.A.

Metrolink Train No. 200 202 204 282 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226Lancaster 3:44 AM 4:46 AM 5:16 AM 5:58 AM 6:48 AM 9:01 AM 11:35 AM 1:45 PM 6:17 PMPalmdale 3:54 AM 4:56 AM 5:26 AM 5:58 AM 6:08 AM 6:58 AM 9:11 AM 11:45 AM 1:55 PM 6:26 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:06 AM 5:08 AM 5:38 AM 6:21 AM 7:10 AM 9:23 AM 11:57 AM 2:07 PM 6:39 PMVia Princessa 4:42 AM 5:44 AM 6:15 AM 6:56 AM 7:48 AM 9:05 AM 9:59 AM 11:26 AM 12:34 PM 1:51 PM 2:43 PM 3:25 PM 7:25 PMSanta Clarita 4:48 AM 5:50 AM 6:21 AM 6:48 AM 7:02 AM 7:55 AM 9:11 AM 10:05 AM 11:32 AM 12:40 PM 1:57 PM 2:49 PM 3:32 PM 5:11 PM 7:31 PMNewhall 4:56 AM 5:58 AM 6:29 AM 7:10 AM 8:02 AM 9:19 AM 10:13 AM 11:40 AM 12:48 PM 2:05 PM 3:03 PM 3:40 PM 5:19 PM 7:46 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:11 AM 6:13 AM 6:45 AM 7:11 AM 7:28 AM 8:20 AM 9:35 AM 10:32 AM 11:56 AM 1:06 PM 2:20 PM 3:17 PM 3:56 PM 5:35 PM 8:00 PMSun Valley 5:18 AM 6:20 AM 6:56 AM 7:36 AM 8:27 AM 9:43 AM 10:40 AM 12:04 PM 1:14 PM 2:29 PM 3:25 PM 4:06 PM 5:43 PM 8:13 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 5:22 AM 6:24 AM 7:00 AM 7:40 AM 8:31 AM 9:47 AM 10:44 AM 12:08 PM 1:18 PM 2:33 PM 3:29 PM 4:10 PM 5:47 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 5:28 AM 6:30 AM 7:05 AM 7:22 AM 7:45 AM 8:37 AM 9:52 AM 10:49 AM 12:13 PM 1:23 PM 2:39 PM 3:35 PM 4:21 PM 5:52 PM 8:22 PMGlendale 5:34 AM 6:36 AM 7:12 AM 7:51 AM 8:43 AM 9:59 AM 10:56 AM 12:20 PM 1:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:41 PM 4:28 PM 5:59 PM 8:29 PML.A. Union Station 5:53 AM 6:55 AM 7:25 AM 7:40 AM 8:06 AM 8:57 AM 10:13 AM 11:08 AM 12:34 PM 1:43 PM 3:01 PM 3:55 PM 4:41 PM 6:14 PM 8:42 PM

Trip Time Revenue Hours 2:09:00 2:09:00 2:09:00 1:42:00 2:08:00 2:09:00 1:08:00 2:07:00 1:08:00 2:08:00 1:10:00 2:10:00 1:16:00 1:03:00 2:25:00

Outbound: L.A. to Lancaster

Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 285 221 223 225 227L.A. Union Station 6:19 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:42 AM 11:06 AM 11:58 AM 1:55 PM 3:28 PM 3:50 PM 4:44 PM 5:34 PM 5:58 PM 6:38 PM 7:36 PM 9:25 PMGlendale 6:31 AM 7:41 AM 8:41 AM 9:54 AM 11:18 AM 12:10 PM 2:07 PM 3:40 PM 4:02 PM 4:56 PM 6:10 PM 6:50 PM 7:48 PM 9:37 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:38 AM 7:49 AM 8:48 AM 10:01 AM 11:25 AM 12:18 PM 2:14 PM 3:48 PM 4:09 PM 5:04 PM 5:51 PM 6:18 PM 6:57 PM 7:55 PM 9:44 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:44 AM 7:55 AM 8:54 AM 10:07 AM 11:31 AM 12:24 PM 2:20 PM 3:54 PM 4:16 PM 5:10 PM 6:23 PM 7:03 PM 8:01 PM 9:50 PMSun Valley 6:49 AM 7:59 AM 8:59 AM 10:12 AM 11:36 AM 12:29 PM 2:25 PM 3:58 PM 4:21 PM 5:14 PM 6:28 PM 7:08 PM 8:06 PM 9:54 PMSylmar/San Fernando 7:01 AM 8:08 AM 9:08 AM 10:21 AM 11:45 AM 12:38 PM 2:36 PM 4:10 PM 4:30 PM 5:24 PM 6:05 PM 6:37 PM 7:17 PM 8:15 PM 10:03 PMNewhall 7:19 AM 8:26 AM 9:24 AM 10:40 AM 12:03 PM 12:54 PM 2:51 PM 4:25 PM 4:45 PM 5:42 PM 6:52 PM 7:32 PM 8:30 PM 10:18 PMSanta Clarita 7:26 AM 8:33 AM 9:32 AM 10:48 AM 12:11 PM 1:02 PM 3:00 PM 4:32 PM 4:52 PM 5:49 PM 6:25 PM 7:00 PM 7:43 PM 8:38 PM 10:26 PMVia Princessa 7:33 AM 8:42 AM 9:40 AM 10:55 AM 12:18 PM 1:12 PM 3:06 PM 4:39 PM 5:56 PM 7:07 PM 7:50 PM 8:45 PM 10:33 PMVincent Grade/Acton 8:12 AM 10:24 AM 12:59 PM 5:17 PM 6:35 PM 7:49 PM 8:28 PM 9:23 PM 11:11 PMPalmdale 8:22 AM 10:35 AM 1:10 PM 5:28 PM 6:50 PM 7:21 PM 8:00 PM 8:39 PM 9:34 PM 11:22 PMLancaster 8:35 AM 10:46 AM 1:20 PM 5:41 PM 6:58 PM 8:12 PM 8:54 PM 9:49 PM 11:37 PM


MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY


ANTELOPE VALLEY LINE

1. Initially-Modeled Scenario Headway Sheets.pdf Appendix 1 Pg 1

SCENARIO 1 - Hourly Only, No ExpressV1


Metrolink Train No. 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228Lancaster 4:27 AM 5:27 AM 6:27 AM 7:27 AM 8:27 AM 9:27 AM 10:27 AM 11:27 AM 12:27 PM 1:27 PM 2:27 PM 3:27 PM 4:27 PM 5:27 PM 6:27 PMPalmdale 4:36 AM 5:36 AM 6:36 AM 7:36 AM 8:36 AM 9:36 AM 10:36 AM 11:36 AM 12:36 PM 1:36 PM 2:36 PM 3:36 PM 4:36 PM 5:36 PM 6:36 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:48 AM 5:48 AM 6:48 AM 7:48 AM 8:48 AM 9:48 AM 10:48 AM 11:48 AM 12:48 PM 1:48 PM 2:48 PM 3:48 PM 4:48 PM 5:48 PM 6:48 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 5:26 AM 6:26 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PMSanta Clarita 5:32 AM 6:32 AM 7:32 AM 8:32 AM 9:32 AM 10:32 AM 11:32 AM 12:32 PM 1:32 PM 2:32 PM 3:32 PM 4:32 PM 5:32 PM 6:32 PM 7:32 PMNewhall 5:40 AM 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:55 AM 6:55 AM 7:55 AM 8:55 AM 9:55 AM 10:55 AM 11:55 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PM 2:55 PM 3:55 PM 4:55 PM 5:55 PM 6:55 PM 7:55 PMSun Valley 6:02 AM 7:02 AM 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:05 AM 7:05 AM 8:05 AM 9:05 AM 10:05 AM 11:05 AM 12:05 PM 1:05 PM 2:05 PM 3:05 PM 4:05 PM 5:05 PM 6:05 PM 7:05 PM 8:05 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:09 AM 7:09 AM 8:09 AM 9:09 AM 10:09 AM 11:09 AM 12:09 PM 1:09 PM 2:09 PM 3:09 PM 4:09 PM 5:09 PM 6:09 PM 7:09 PM 8:09 PMGlendale 6:16 AM 7:16 AM 8:16 AM 9:16 AM 10:16 AM 11:16 AM 12:16 PM 1:16 PM 2:16 PM 3:16 PM 4:16 PM 5:16 PM 6:16 PM 7:16 PM 8:16 PML.A. Union Station 6:26 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PM 8:26 PM



Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 221 223 225 227 229L.A. Union Station 6:06 AM 7:06 AM 8:06 AM 9:06 AM 10:06 AM 11:06 AM 12:06 PM 1:06 PM 2:06 PM 3:06 PM 4:06 PM 5:06 PM 6:06 PM 7:06 PM 8:06 PMGlendale 6:17 AM 7:17 AM 8:17 AM 9:17 AM 10:17 AM 11:17 AM 12:17 PM 1:17 PM 2:17 PM 3:17 PM 4:17 PM 5:17 PM 6:17 PM 7:17 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:24 AM 7:24 AM 8:24 AM 9:24 AM 10:24 AM 11:24 AM 12:24 PM 1:24 PM 2:24 PM 3:24 PM 4:24 PM 5:24 PM 6:24 PM 7:24 PM 8:24 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:29 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:29 AM 10:29 AM 11:29 AM 12:29 PM 1:29 PM 2:29 PM 3:29 PM 4:29 PM 5:29 PM 6:29 PM 7:29 PM 8:29 PMSun Valley 6:33 AM 7:33 AM 8:33 AM 9:33 AM 10:33 AM 11:33 AM 12:33 PM 1:33 PM 2:33 PM 3:33 PM 4:33 PM 5:33 PM 6:33 PM 7:33 PM 8:33 PMSylmar/San Fernando 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PM 8:40 PMNewhall 6:57 AM 7:57 AM 8:57 AM 9:57 AM 10:57 AM 11:57 AM 12:57 PM 1:57 PM 2:57 PM 3:57 PM 4:57 PM 5:57 PM 6:57 PM 7:57 PM 8:57 PMSanta Clarita 7:04 AM 8:04 AM 9:04 AM 10:04 AM 11:04 AM 12:04 PM 1:04 PM 2:04 PM 3:04 PM 4:04 PM 5:04 PM 6:04 PM 7:04 PM 8:04 PM 9:04 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 7:13 AM 8:13 AM 9:13 AM 10:13 AM 11:13 AM 12:13 PM 1:13 PM 2:13 PM 3:13 PM 4:13 PM 5:13 PM 6:13 PM 7:13 PM 8:13 PM 9:13 PMVincent Grade/Acton 7:51 AM 8:51 AM 9:51 AM 10:51 AM 11:51 AM 12:51 PM 1:51 PM 2:51 PM 3:51 PM 4:51 PM 5:51 PM 6:51 PM 7:51 PM 8:51 PM 9:51 PMPalmdale 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PM 9:02 PM 10:02 PMLancaster 8:10 AM 9:10 AM 10:10 AM 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:10 PM 2:10 PM 3:10 PM 4:10 PM 5:10 PM 6:10 PM 7:10 PM 8:10 PM 9:10 PM 10:10 PM






SCENARIO 2 - 30-60, No ExpressV1 30-60


Metrolink Train No. 200 202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228 230 232Lancaster 4:27 AM 5:27 AM 6:27 AM 7:27 AM 8:27 AM 9:27 AM 10:27 AM 11:27 AM 12:27 PM 1:27 PM 2:27 PM 3:27 PM 4:27 PM 5:27 PM 6:27 PMPalmdale 4:36 AM 5:36 AM 6:36 AM 7:36 AM 8:36 AM 9:36 AM 10:36 AM 11:36 AM 12:36 PM 1:36 PM 2:36 PM 3:36 PM 4:36 PM 5:36 PM 6:36 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:48 AM 5:48 AM 6:48 AM 7:48 AM 8:48 AM 9:48 AM 10:48 AM 11:48 AM 12:48 PM 1:48 PM 2:48 PM 3:48 PM 4:48 PM 5:48 PM 6:48 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 5:26 AM 5:53 AM 6:26 AM 6:53 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PMSanta Clarita 5:32 AM 6:04 AM 6:32 AM 7:04 AM 7:32 AM 8:32 AM 9:32 AM 10:32 AM 11:32 AM 12:32 PM 1:32 PM 2:32 PM 3:32 PM 4:32 PM 5:32 PM 6:32 PM 7:32 PMNewhall 5:40 AM 6:11 AM 6:40 AM 7:11 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:55 AM 6:26 AM 6:55 AM 7:26 AM 7:55 AM 8:55 AM 9:55 AM 10:55 AM 11:55 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PM 2:55 PM 3:55 PM 4:55 PM 5:55 PM 6:55 PM 7:55 PMSun Valley 6:02 AM 6:32 AM 7:02 AM 7:32 AM 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:05 AM 6:35 AM 7:05 AM 7:35 AM 8:05 AM 9:05 AM 10:05 AM 11:05 AM 12:05 PM 1:05 PM 2:05 PM 3:05 PM 4:05 PM 5:05 PM 6:05 PM 7:05 PM 8:05 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:09 AM 6:40 AM 7:09 AM 7:40 AM 8:09 AM 9:09 AM 10:09 AM 11:09 AM 12:09 PM 1:09 PM 2:09 PM 3:09 PM 4:09 PM 5:09 PM 6:09 PM 7:09 PM 8:09 PMGlendale 6:16 AM 6:46 AM 7:16 AM 7:46 AM 8:16 AM 9:16 AM 10:16 AM 11:16 AM 12:16 PM 1:16 PM 2:16 PM 3:16 PM 4:16 PM 5:16 PM 6:16 PM 7:16 PM 8:16 PML.A. Union Station 6:26 AM 6:57 AM 7:26 AM 7:57 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PM 8:26 PM

Trip Time Revenue Hours 1:59:00 1:04:00 1:59:00 1:04:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00


Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 221 223 225 227 229 231 233L.A. Union Station 6:06 AM 7:06 AM 8:06 AM 9:06 AM 10:06 AM 11:06 AM 12:06 PM 1:06 PM 2:06 PM 3:06 PM 4:06 PM 5:06 PM 5:36 PM 6:06 PM 6:36 PM 7:06 PM 8:06 PMGlendale 6:17 AM 7:17 AM 8:17 AM 9:17 AM 10:17 AM 11:17 AM 12:17 PM 1:17 PM 2:17 PM 3:17 PM 4:17 PM 5:17 PM 5:46 PM 6:17 PM 6:46 PM 7:17 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:24 AM 7:24 AM 8:24 AM 9:24 AM 10:24 AM 11:24 AM 12:24 PM 1:24 PM 2:24 PM 3:24 PM 4:24 PM 5:24 PM 5:54 PM 6:24 PM 6:54 PM 7:24 PM 8:24 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:29 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:29 AM 10:29 AM 11:29 AM 12:29 PM 1:29 PM 2:29 PM 3:29 PM 4:29 PM 5:29 PM 6:00 PM 6:29 PM 7:00 PM 7:29 PM 8:29 PMSun Valley 6:33 AM 7:33 AM 8:33 AM 9:33 AM 10:33 AM 11:33 AM 12:33 PM 1:33 PM 2:33 PM 3:33 PM 4:33 PM 5:33 PM 6:03 PM 6:33 PM 7:03 PM 7:33 PM 8:33 PMSylmar/San Fernando 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:10 PM 6:40 PM 7:10 PM 7:40 PM 8:40 PMNewhall 6:57 AM 7:57 AM 8:57 AM 9:57 AM 10:57 AM 11:57 AM 12:57 PM 1:57 PM 2:57 PM 3:57 PM 4:57 PM 5:57 PM 6:27 PM 6:57 PM 7:27 PM 7:57 PM 8:57 PMSanta Clarita 7:04 AM 8:04 AM 9:04 AM 10:04 AM 11:04 AM 12:04 PM 1:04 PM 2:04 PM 3:04 PM 4:04 PM 5:04 PM 6:04 PM 6:34 PM 7:04 PM 7:34 PM 8:04 PM 9:04 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 7:13 AM 8:13 AM 9:13 AM 10:13 AM 11:13 AM 12:13 PM 1:13 PM 2:13 PM 3:13 PM 4:13 PM 5:13 PM 6:13 PM 6:42 PM 7:13 PM 7:42 PM 8:13 PM 9:13 PMVincent Grade/Acton 7:51 AM 8:51 AM 9:51 AM 10:51 AM 11:51 AM 12:51 PM 1:51 PM 2:51 PM 3:51 PM 4:51 PM 5:51 PM 6:51 PM 7:51 PM 8:51 PM 9:51 PMPalmdale 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PM 9:02 PM 10:02 PMLancaster 8:10 AM 9:10 AM 10:10 AM 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:10 PM 2:10 PM 3:10 PM 4:10 PM 5:10 PM 6:10 PM 7:10 PM 8:10 PM 9:10 PM 10:10 PM

Trip Time Revenue Hours 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 1:06:00 2:04:00 1:06:00 2:04:00 2:04:00

= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for non-revenue moves and turn-around





SCENARIO 3 - 30-60, with ExpressV1 SCORE 2023


Metrolink Train No. 200 202 282 204 206 284 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228 230 232Lancaster 4:27 AM 5:15 AM 5:27 AM 6:15 AM 6:27 AM 7:27 AM 8:27 AM 9:27 AM 10:27 AM 11:27 AM 12:27 PM 1:27 PM 2:27 PM 3:27 PM 4:27 PM 5:27 PM 6:27 PMPalmdale 4:36 AM 5:25 AM 5:36 AM 6:25 AM 6:36 AM 7:36 AM 8:36 AM 9:36 AM 10:36 AM 11:36 AM 12:36 PM 1:36 PM 2:36 PM 3:36 PM 4:36 PM 5:36 PM 6:36 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:48 AM 5:48 AM 6:48 AM 7:48 AM 8:48 AM 9:48 AM 10:48 AM 11:48 AM 12:48 PM 1:48 PM 2:48 PM 3:48 PM 4:48 PM 5:48 PM 6:48 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 5:26 AM 5:53 AM 6:26 AM 6:53 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PMSanta Clarita 5:32 AM 6:04 AM 6:17 AM 6:32 AM 7:04 AM 7:17 AM 7:32 AM 8:32 AM 9:32 AM 10:32 AM 11:32 AM 12:32 PM 1:32 PM 2:32 PM 3:32 PM 4:32 PM 5:32 PM 6:32 PM 7:32 PMNewhall 5:40 AM 6:11 AM 6:40 AM 7:11 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:55 AM 6:26 AM 6:39 AM 6:55 AM 7:26 AM 7:39 AM 7:55 AM 8:55 AM 9:55 AM 10:55 AM 11:55 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PM 2:55 PM 3:55 PM 4:55 PM 5:55 PM 6:55 PM 7:55 PMSun Valley 6:02 AM 6:32 AM 7:02 AM 7:32 AM 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:05 AM 6:35 AM 7:05 AM 7:35 AM 8:05 AM 9:05 AM 10:05 AM 11:05 AM 12:05 PM 1:05 PM 2:05 PM 3:05 PM 4:05 PM 5:05 PM 6:05 PM 7:05 PM 8:05 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:09 AM 6:40 AM 6:51 AM 7:09 AM 7:40 AM 7:51 AM 8:09 AM 9:09 AM 10:09 AM 11:09 AM 12:09 PM 1:09 PM 2:09 PM 3:09 PM 4:09 PM 5:09 PM 6:09 PM 7:09 PM 8:09 PMGlendale 6:16 AM 6:46 AM 7:16 AM 7:46 AM 8:16 AM 9:16 AM 10:16 AM 11:16 AM 12:16 PM 1:16 PM 2:16 PM 3:16 PM 4:16 PM 5:16 PM 6:16 PM 7:16 PM 8:16 PML.A. Union Station 6:26 AM 6:57 AM 7:06 AM 7:26 AM 7:57 AM 8:06 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PM 8:26 PM

Trip Time Revenue Hours 1:59:00 1:04:00 1:51:00 1:59:00 1:04:00 1:51:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00 1:59:00


Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 221 223 285 225 227 287 229 231 233L.A. Union Station 6:06 AM 7:06 AM 8:06 AM 9:06 AM 10:06 AM 11:06 AM 12:06 PM 1:06 PM 2:06 PM 3:06 PM 4:06 PM 5:06 PM 5:27 PM 5:36 PM 6:06 PM 6:27 PM 6:36 PM 7:06 PM 8:06 PMGlendale 6:17 AM 7:17 AM 8:17 AM 9:17 AM 10:17 AM 11:17 AM 12:17 PM 1:17 PM 2:17 PM 3:17 PM 4:17 PM 5:17 PM 5:46 PM 6:17 PM 6:46 PM 7:17 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:24 AM 7:24 AM 8:24 AM 9:24 AM 10:24 AM 11:24 AM 12:24 PM 1:24 PM 2:24 PM 3:24 PM 4:24 PM 5:24 PM 5:42 PM 5:54 PM 6:24 PM 6:42 PM 6:54 PM 7:24 PM 8:24 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:29 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:29 AM 10:29 AM 11:29 AM 12:29 PM 1:29 PM 2:29 PM 3:29 PM 4:29 PM 5:29 PM 6:00 PM 6:29 PM 7:00 PM 7:29 PM 8:29 PMSun Valley 6:33 AM 7:33 AM 8:33 AM 9:33 AM 10:33 AM 11:33 AM 12:33 PM 1:33 PM 2:33 PM 3:33 PM 4:33 PM 5:33 PM 6:03 PM 6:33 PM 7:03 PM 7:33 PM 8:33 PMSylmar/San Fernando 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 5:56 PM 6:10 PM 6:40 PM 6:56 PM 7:10 PM 7:40 PM 8:40 PMNewhall 6:57 AM 7:57 AM 8:57 AM 9:57 AM 10:57 AM 11:57 AM 12:57 PM 1:57 PM 2:57 PM 3:57 PM 4:57 PM 5:57 PM 6:27 PM 6:57 PM 7:27 PM 7:57 PM 8:57 PMSanta Clarita 7:04 AM 8:04 AM 9:04 AM 10:04 AM 11:04 AM 12:04 PM 1:04 PM 2:04 PM 3:04 PM 4:04 PM 5:04 PM 6:04 PM 6:19 PM 6:34 PM 7:04 PM 7:19 PM 7:34 PM 8:04 PM 9:04 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 7:13 AM 8:13 AM 9:13 AM 10:13 AM 11:13 AM 12:13 PM 1:13 PM 2:13 PM 3:13 PM 4:13 PM 5:13 PM 6:13 PM 6:42 PM 7:13 PM 7:42 PM 8:13 PM 9:13 PMVincent Grade/Acton 7:51 AM 8:51 AM 9:51 AM 10:51 AM 11:51 AM 12:51 PM 1:51 PM 2:51 PM 3:51 PM 4:51 PM 5:51 PM 6:51 PM 7:51 PM 8:51 PM 9:51 PMPalmdale 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 7:12 PM 8:02 PM 8:12 PM 9:02 PM 10:02 PMLancaster 8:10 AM 9:10 AM 10:10 AM 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:10 PM 2:10 PM 3:10 PM 4:10 PM 5:10 PM 6:10 PM 7:10 PM 7:20 PM 8:10 PM 8:20 PM 9:10 PM 10:10 PM


= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for non-revenue moves and turn-around = Express Trains





SCENARIO 4 - Hourly Express, Local, & Inner Zone LocalV3 3-Hourly


Metrolink Train No. 200 202 282 204 284 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228 230 232Lancaster 4:27 AM 4:57 AM 5:27 AM 5:57 AM 6:27 AM 7:27 AM 8:27 AM 9:27 AM 10:27 AM 11:27 AM 12:27 PM 1:27 PM 2:27 PM 3:27 PM 4:27 PM 5:27 PM 6:27 PMPalmdale 4:36 AM 5:06 AM 5:36 AM 6:06 AM 6:36 AM 7:36 AM 8:36 AM 9:36 AM 10:36 AM 11:36 AM 12:36 PM 1:36 PM 2:36 PM 3:36 PM 4:36 PM 5:36 PM 6:36 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:48 AM 5:48 AM 6:48 AM 7:48 AM 8:48 AM 9:48 AM 10:48 AM 11:48 AM 12:48 PM 1:48 PM 2:48 PM 3:48 PM 4:48 PM 5:48 PM 6:48 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 5:26 AM 5:58 AM 6:26 AM 6:58 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PMSanta Clarita 5:32 AM 6:06 AM 6:00 AM 6:32 AM 7:00 AM 7:06 AM 7:32 AM 8:32 AM 9:32 AM 10:32 AM 11:32 AM 12:32 PM 1:32 PM 2:32 PM 3:32 PM 4:32 PM 5:32 PM 6:32 PM 7:32 PMNewhall 5:40 AM 6:14 AM 6:40 AM 7:14 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:55 AM 6:29 AM 6:21 AM 6:55 AM 7:21 AM 7:29 AM 7:55 AM 8:55 AM 9:55 AM 10:55 AM 11:55 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PM 2:55 PM 3:55 PM 4:55 PM 5:55 PM 6:55 PM 7:55 PMSun Valley 6:02 AM 6:36 AM 7:02 AM 7:36 AM 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:05 AM 6:38 AM 7:05 AM 7:38 AM 8:05 AM 9:05 AM 10:05 AM 11:05 AM 12:05 PM 1:05 PM 2:05 PM 3:05 PM 4:05 PM 5:05 PM 6:05 PM 7:05 PM 8:05 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:09 AM 6:43 AM 6:33 AM 7:09 AM 7:33 AM 7:43 AM 8:09 AM 9:09 AM 10:09 AM 11:09 AM 12:09 PM 1:09 PM 2:09 PM 3:09 PM 4:09 PM 5:09 PM 6:09 PM 7:09 PM 8:09 PMGlendale 6:16 AM 6:49 AM 7:16 AM 7:49 AM 8:16 AM 9:16 AM 10:16 AM 11:16 AM 12:16 PM 1:16 PM 2:16 PM 3:16 PM 4:16 PM 5:16 PM 6:16 PM 7:16 PM 8:16 PML.A. Union Station 6:26 AM 7:00 AM 6:47 AM 7:26 AM 7:47 AM 8:00 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PM 8:26 PM



Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 221 285 223 225 287 227 229 231 233L.A. Union Station 6:06 AM 7:06 AM 8:06 AM 9:06 AM 10:06 AM 11:06 AM 12:06 PM 1:06 PM 2:06 PM 3:06 PM 4:06 PM 4:47 PM 5:06 PM 5:32 PM 5:47 PM 6:06 PM 6:32 PM 7:06 PM 8:06 PMGlendale 6:17 AM 7:17 AM 8:17 AM 9:17 AM 10:17 AM 11:17 AM 12:17 PM 1:17 PM 2:17 PM 3:17 PM 4:17 PM 5:17 PM 5:43 PM 6:17 PM 6:43 PM 7:17 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:24 AM 7:24 AM 8:24 AM 9:24 AM 10:24 AM 11:24 AM 12:24 PM 1:24 PM 2:24 PM 3:24 PM 4:24 PM 5:02 PM 5:24 PM 5:51 PM 6:02 PM 6:24 PM 6:51 PM 7:24 PM 8:24 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:29 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:29 AM 10:29 AM 11:29 AM 12:29 PM 1:29 PM 2:29 PM 3:29 PM 4:29 PM 5:29 PM 5:56 PM 6:29 PM 6:56 PM 7:29 PM 8:29 PMSun Valley 6:33 AM 7:33 AM 8:33 AM 9:33 AM 10:33 AM 11:33 AM 12:33 PM 1:33 PM 2:33 PM 3:33 PM 4:33 PM 5:33 PM 5:58 PM 6:33 PM 6:58 PM 7:33 PM 8:33 PMSylmar/San Fernando 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:16 PM 5:40 PM 6:07 PM 6:16 PM 6:40 PM 7:07 PM 7:40 PM 8:40 PMNewhall 6:57 AM 7:57 AM 8:57 AM 9:57 AM 10:57 AM 11:57 AM 12:57 PM 1:57 PM 2:57 PM 3:57 PM 4:57 PM 5:57 PM 6:22 PM 6:57 PM 7:22 PM 7:57 PM 8:57 PMSanta Clarita 7:04 AM 8:04 AM 9:04 AM 10:04 AM 11:04 AM 12:04 PM 1:04 PM 2:04 PM 3:04 PM 4:04 PM 5:04 PM 5:37 PM 6:04 PM 6:29 PM 6:37 PM 7:04 PM 7:29 PM 8:04 PM 9:04 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 7:13 AM 8:13 AM 9:13 AM 10:13 AM 11:13 AM 12:13 PM 1:13 PM 2:13 PM 3:13 PM 4:13 PM 5:13 PM 6:13 PM 6:39 PM 7:13 PM 7:39 PM 8:13 PM 9:13 PMVincent Grade/Acton 7:51 AM 8:51 AM 9:51 AM 10:51 AM 11:51 AM 12:51 PM 1:51 PM 2:51 PM 3:51 PM 4:51 PM 5:51 PM 6:51 PM 7:51 PM 8:51 PM 9:51 PMPalmdale 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 6:32 PM 7:02 PM 7:32 PM 8:02 PM 9:02 PM 10:02 PMLancaster 8:10 AM 9:10 AM 10:10 AM 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:10 PM 2:10 PM 3:10 PM 4:10 PM 5:10 PM 6:10 PM 6:45 PM 7:10 PM 7:45 PM 8:10 PM 9:10 PM 10:10 PM

Trip Time Revenue Hours 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 2:04:00 1:07:00 1:58:00 2:04:00 1:07:00 2:04:00 2:04:00






SCENARIO 5 - Hourly Express, Local, & Inner Zone Local - Short Turns in Sylmar instead of Via Princessa/Vista CanyonV4 3-Hourly Patterns


Metrolink Train No. 200 202 282 204 284 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 228 230 232Lancaster 4:27 AM 4:57 AM 5:27 AM 5:57 AM 6:27 AM 7:27 AM 8:27 AM 9:27 AM 10:27 AM 11:27 AM 12:27 PM 1:27 PM 2:27 PM 3:27 PM 4:27 PM 5:27 PM 6:27 PMPalmdale 4:36 AM 5:06 AM 5:36 AM 6:06 AM 6:36 AM 7:36 AM 8:36 AM 9:36 AM 10:36 AM 11:36 AM 12:36 PM 1:36 PM 2:36 PM 3:36 PM 4:36 PM 5:36 PM 6:36 PMVincent Grade/Acton 4:48 AM 5:48 AM 6:48 AM 7:48 AM 8:48 AM 9:48 AM 10:48 AM 11:48 AM 12:48 PM 1:48 PM 2:48 PM 3:48 PM 4:48 PM 5:48 PM 6:48 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 5:26 AM 6:26 AM 7:26 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PMSanta Clarita 5:32 AM 6:00 AM 6:32 AM 7:00 AM 7:32 AM 8:32 AM 9:32 AM 10:32 AM 11:32 AM 12:32 PM 1:32 PM 2:32 PM 3:32 PM 4:32 PM 5:32 PM 6:32 PM 7:32 PMNewhall 5:40 AM 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:40 PM 6:40 PM 7:40 PMSylmar/San Fernando 5:55 AM 6:31 AM 6:21 AM 6:55 AM 7:21 AM 7:31 AM 7:55 AM 8:55 AM 9:55 AM 10:55 AM 11:55 AM 12:55 PM 1:55 PM 2:55 PM 3:55 PM 4:55 PM 5:55 PM 6:55 PM 7:55 PMSun Valley 6:02 AM 6:37 AM 7:02 AM 7:37 AM 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 7:02 PM 8:02 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:05 AM 6:40 AM 7:05 AM 7:40 AM 8:05 AM 9:05 AM 10:05 AM 11:05 AM 12:05 PM 1:05 PM 2:05 PM 3:05 PM 4:05 PM 5:05 PM 6:05 PM 7:05 PM 8:05 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:09 AM 6:45 AM 6:33 AM 7:09 AM 7:33 AM 7:45 AM 8:09 AM 9:09 AM 10:09 AM 11:09 AM 12:09 PM 1:09 PM 2:09 PM 3:09 PM 4:09 PM 5:09 PM 6:09 PM 7:09 PM 8:09 PMGlendale 6:16 AM 6:52 AM 7:16 AM 7:52 AM 8:16 AM 9:16 AM 10:16 AM 11:16 AM 12:16 PM 1:16 PM 2:16 PM 3:16 PM 4:16 PM 5:16 PM 6:16 PM 7:16 PM 8:16 PML.A. Union Station 6:26 AM 7:02 AM 6:47 AM 7:26 AM 7:47 AM 8:02 AM 8:26 AM 9:26 AM 10:26 AM 11:26 AM 12:26 PM 1:26 PM 2:26 PM 3:26 PM 4:26 PM 5:26 PM 6:26 PM 7:26 PM 8:26 PM



Metrolink Train No. 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 221 285 223 225 287 227 229 231 233L.A. Union Station 6:06 AM 7:06 AM 8:06 AM 9:06 AM 10:06 AM 11:06 AM 12:06 PM 1:06 PM 2:06 PM 3:06 PM 4:06 PM 4:47 PM 5:06 PM 5:32 PM 5:47 PM 6:06 PM 6:32 PM 7:06 PM 8:06 PMGlendale 6:17 AM 7:17 AM 8:17 AM 9:17 AM 10:17 AM 11:17 AM 12:17 PM 1:17 PM 2:17 PM 3:17 PM 4:17 PM 5:17 PM 5:43 PM 6:17 PM 6:43 PM 7:17 PM 8:17 PMBurbank - Downtown 6:24 AM 7:24 AM 8:24 AM 9:24 AM 10:24 AM 11:24 AM 12:24 PM 1:24 PM 2:24 PM 3:24 PM 4:24 PM 5:02 PM 5:24 PM 5:51 PM 6:02 PM 6:24 PM 6:51 PM 7:24 PM 8:24 PMBurbank Airport - North (AV Line) 6:29 AM 7:29 AM 8:29 AM 9:29 AM 10:29 AM 11:29 AM 12:29 PM 1:29 PM 2:29 PM 3:29 PM 4:29 PM 5:29 PM 5:56 PM 6:29 PM 6:56 PM 7:29 PM 8:29 PMSun Valley 6:33 AM 7:33 AM 8:33 AM 9:33 AM 10:33 AM 11:33 AM 12:33 PM 1:33 PM 2:33 PM 3:33 PM 4:33 PM 5:33 PM 5:58 PM 6:33 PM 6:58 PM 7:33 PM 8:33 PMSylmar/San Fernando 6:40 AM 7:40 AM 8:40 AM 9:40 AM 10:40 AM 11:40 AM 12:40 PM 1:40 PM 2:40 PM 3:40 PM 4:40 PM 5:16 PM 5:40 PM 6:07 PM 6:16 PM 6:40 PM 7:07 PM 7:40 PM 8:40 PMNewhall 6:57 AM 7:57 AM 8:57 AM 9:57 AM 10:57 AM 11:57 AM 12:57 PM 1:57 PM 2:57 PM 3:57 PM 4:57 PM 5:57 PM 6:57 PM 7:57 PM 8:57 PMSanta Clarita 7:04 AM 8:04 AM 9:04 AM 10:04 AM 11:04 AM 12:04 PM 1:04 PM 2:04 PM 3:04 PM 4:04 PM 5:04 PM 5:37 PM 6:04 PM 6:37 PM 7:04 PM 8:04 PM 9:04 PMVia Princessa/Vista Canyon 7:13 AM 8:13 AM 9:13 AM 10:13 AM 11:13 AM 12:13 PM 1:13 PM 2:13 PM 3:13 PM 4:13 PM 5:13 PM 6:13 PM 7:13 PM 8:13 PM 9:13 PMVincent Grade/Acton 7:51 AM 8:51 AM 9:51 AM 10:51 AM 11:51 AM 12:51 PM 1:51 PM 2:51 PM 3:51 PM 4:51 PM 5:51 PM 6:51 PM 7:51 PM 8:51 PM 9:51 PMPalmdale 8:02 AM 9:02 AM 10:02 AM 11:02 AM 12:02 PM 1:02 PM 2:02 PM 3:02 PM 4:02 PM 5:02 PM 6:02 PM 6:32 PM 7:02 PM 7:32 PM 8:02 PM 9:02 PM 10:02 PMLancaster 8:10 AM 9:10 AM 10:10 AM 11:10 AM 12:10 PM 1:10 PM 2:10 PM 3:10 PM 4:10 PM 5:10 PM 6:10 PM 6:45 PM 7:10 PM 7:45 PM 8:10 PM 9:10 PM 10:10 PM







7 Attachments



APPENDIX 2 – ATTACHMENT 2 Operations and Maintenance Cost Summaries

ANTELOPE VALLEY LINE STUDYContract No. PS-2415-3024-03

DRAFT Operations and Maintenance Cost Increase EstimatesFor Revised Service Scenarios

Prepared for:

Los Angeles CountyMetropolitan Transportation Authority

Prepared by:

444 South Flower StreetSuite 800

Los Angeles, California 90071

February 6, 2019

Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimates forRevised Service Scenarios

Date Initials

Originator 02-05-19 Tom L.

Checker 02-05-19 Salvador M.

Back Checker 02-06-19 Tom L.

Format Checker 02-05-19 Foster N.

Approved by 02-06-19 Tom L.

AVL Scenarios Revised2/5/2019

Scenario Peak Service Late NightAssumption

Off-PeakAssumption

WeekendAssumption

Capital Impact over Baseline

Revised Scenario 1:Late Evening Trip

Existing Peak service 1 late night tripLAUS - LAN

Current schedule Current Scheduleplus 1 Late Night TripSaturday

None


Existing Peak service 1 late night tripLAUS - LAN

Inbound: Twoadditional mid-daytrips;Outbound: Twoadditional mid-daytrips or one mid-dayand one additionallate night trip

Hourly Saturday, bi-hourly Sunday, withone late evening tripon Saturday

Requires Balboa SidingExtension totaling $41.8million

Revised Scenario 3:Improved PeakService and Semi-Hourly Off-PeakService

Existing Peak servicewith modestimprovements

2 late night tripsLAUS - LAN

30-minute mid-dayon inner portion ofthe line LAUS to VistaCanyon, hourly outto Lancaster

Hourly Saturday, bi-hourly Sunday, withtwo late eveningtrips on Saturday

Requires Balboa SidingExtension and threeadditional capital projectstotaling $175.2 million

Revised Scenario 4:Three Patterns: Semi-hourly plus expressservice

Three hourly patterns -full-corridor local, short-turn local, and Express,all on clockfaceheadways




Requires eight capitalprojects totaling $328.9million

Revised Scenario 5:Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus ExpressService with Hub atSanta Clarita





Requires seven capitalprojects totaling $428.6million

Revised Scenario 6:Semi-Hourly PlusExpress Service withHub at Sylmar





Requires eight capitalprojects totaling $448.7million

Updated 2-5-19

Appendix 2. Operations and Maintenance Cost Summaries Appendix 2 - Pg. 1

Summary Annualized Operating Cost Increase of Combined Scenarios*

Service OptionWeekday Base

IncreaseWeekday Night

IncreaseSaturday Base

IncreaseSaturday Night

IncreaseSunday Base

IncreaseSunday Night

Increase TOTALScenario 1 -$ 2,306,327$ -$ 432,899$ -$ -$ 2,739,226$

Scenario 2 5,792,027$ 2,306,327$ 2,907,370$ 432,899$ 345,744$ -$ 11,784,367$

Scenario 3 21,066,205$ 4,492,097$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 29,677,214$

Scenario 4 28,829,094$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 37,277,611$

Scenario 5 29,615,342$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 38,063,859$

Scenario 6 22,093,569$ 4,329,606$ 2,907,370$ 865,798$ 345,744$ -$ 30,542,087$

*Please refer to Scenario Descriptions for Assumptions


Antelope Valley Line Study Operating Cost CalculatorRevised Weekday Scenarios 1 - 6

2/5/2019Scenario 1: Weekdays - 1 Late Night Trip LAUS - LAN, Existing Peak and Mid-Day

Day Type # of DaysExisting Service

HoursRevised BaseService Hours

Net Change inService Hours per

Day TypeOperating Cost

per Service HourTotal Annual Cost

ImpactWeekdays 255 54.83 54.83 0 2,055.55$ -$Plus 1st Late Trip 255 4.40 2,055.55$ 2,306,327$

TOTAL COST 2,306,327$

Scenario 2: Two Additional Off-Peak Round Trips






ImpactWeekday 255 54.83 65.88 11.05 2,055.55$ 5,792,027$Plus 1st Late Trip 255 4.40 2,055.55$ 2,306,327$TOTAL COST 8,098,355$

Scenario 3: Improved Peak Service and Semi-Hourly Off-Peak Service






ImpactWeekday 255 54.83 95.02 40.19 2,055.55$ 21,066,205$Plus 1st Late Trip 255 4.40 2,055.55$ 2,306,327$Plus 2nd Late Trip 255 4.17 2,055.55$ 2,185,769$TOTAL COST 25,558,302$

Scenario 4: Three Patterns: Semi-hourly plus express service







Scenario 5: Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Santa Clarita







Scenario 6: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Sylmar








Annualized Cost CalculatorSaturday Service Levels for Scenarios

Scenario 1: Leave Saturday as is currently, Add one late night trip Saturday


Hours

Revised BasePeriod Service

Hours




ImpactSaturday 52 25.45 25.45 0.00 2,055.55$ -$Plus 1st Late Trip 52 4.05 2,055.55$ 432,899$TOTAL COST 432,899$

Scenario 2: Hourly Saturday Service and 1 Late night trip


Hours


Hours




ImpactSaturday 52 25.45 52.65 27.20 2,055.55$ 2,907,370$Plus 1st Late Trip 52 4.05 2,055.55$ 432,899$TOTAL COST 3,340,269$

Scenarios 3 - 6: Hourly Saturday Service and 2 Late Night Trips


Hours


Hours




ImpactSaturday 52 25.45 52.65 27.20 2,055.55$ 2,907,370$Plus 1st Late Trip 52 4.05 2,055.55$ 432,899$Plus 2nd Late Trip 52 4.05 2,055.55$ 432,899$TOTAL COST 3,773,168$


Annualized Cost CalculatorSunday Service Levels for Scenarios

Scenario 1: Leave Sunday as is


Hours


Hours




ImpactSunday 58 25.45 25.45 0.00 2,055.55$ -$Plus 1st Late Trip 58 0 0 0.00 2,055.55$ -$TOTAL COST -$

Scenarios 2 - 6: Bi-Hourly Clockface headways on Sundays


Hours


Hours




ImpactSunday 58 25.45 28.35 2.9 2,055.55$ 345,744$Plus 1st Late Trip 58 0 0 0 2,055.55$ -$TOTAL COST 345,744$


Metrolink Operating Expenses and Train Service HoursFrom Metrolink Comprehensive Annual Financial Report FY17

Item Value SourceTotal Train Operations Costs 175,618,000$ From Page 9Service Hours 85,436 From Page 10 and 71

Train Operations Cost/Service Hour, FY17 2,055.55$


7 Attachments



APPENDIX 2 – ATTACHMENT 3 PowerPoint Presentation to Stakeholders, December 12, 2018

Metro Provides Excellence in Service and Support.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority


Preliminary Findings

Stakeholder MeetingDecember 12, 2018

22

Agenda

A. Introduction

B. Technical Presentation and Discussion1. Overview

2. Ridership Market Benefits

3. Service Scenario Components

4. Service Scenario Development and Analysis

5. Evaluation Methodology

C. Breakout Sessions1. Exercise 1 – Prioritize Markets by Geographic Area and Trip Purpose

2. Exercise 2 – Identify Preferences for Types of Service Improvement, Given Finite Funding

D. Report out from breakout sessions

E. Discussion

F. Other Items / Next Steps

Appendix 3. PowerPoint Presentation to Stakeholders, December 12, 2018

33

Study Scope of Work Goals and Objectives:

1. Study clock-face scheduling based on 1-hour or 30-minute frequencies, including the following service options:

a) Hourly bi-directional service covering entire corridor all day

b) Hourly bi-directional in entire corridor, plus additional hourly partial trips L.A. Union Station to Via Princessa/Vista Canyon

c) Service consistent with State Rail Plan: Hourly bi-directional, hourly partial trips to Via Princessa/Vista Canyon, plus hourly peak-period/peak direction express trains

2. Prioritize infrastructure projects in order to deliver capacity for 1-hour and 30-minute service to the AVL corridor on the regional rail system.

A. Overview

Lancaster

L.A. Union Sta.


44

A. Overview

ExistingAVL

Service

Coordinated Future Rail Network

CA High-Speed RailBightline Intercity Rail

Metrolink Service Targets per State Rail PlanFrequent Service

Bi-Directional ServicePeak Express Service

Clock-face Service

Focus of AVL Study

Summary of Service Improvement Trajectory

InitialIncremental

Service Improvements


55

A. Overview

1. Project Statusa) Existing AVL Service:

Existing Conditions and Market Analysis completed

b) Incremental Service Improvement Scenarios: Multiple scenarios with clock-face schedules developed and compared to existing service

c) Interim Improvements for Service Scenarios: Capital projects needed for each scenario identified, capital and operating costs estimated, service scenario evaluation underway

d) Coordination with Parallel Efforts: CA HSR; Virgin Trains USA; UPRR;L.A.-Glendale-Burbank Corridor Study

2. Seeking feedback and guidance from stakeholdersa) Prioritization of travel markets (geographic and trip purpose)

b) Preferences for service improvement types


66

B. Ridership Market Comparison


77

B. Ridership Markets

Aggregated Station Catchment Areas for Metrolink Trips


88

B. Ridership Markets – Catchment Zone Pairs

Total Daily Trips

Highest volumeor mode share

Lowest volumeor mode share

Directionality:

Pk=Peak direction travel to or through Central L.A.

Int=Peak direction travel to intermediate points within AVL Corridor

Rev=Reverse-peak direction travel

Source: SCAG daily trip data for 2012, from regional travel demand model

All-Mode Rail Rail

Origin Zone Destination Zone Dir Total Trips Trips Share

Santa Clarita Valley San Fernando Valley Int 147,300 390 0.3%

San Fernando Valley Central L.A. / Burbank Pk 146,041 579 0.4%

Santa Clarita Valley Central L.A. / Burbank Pk 58,060 1,715 3.0%

Central L.A. / Burbank San Fernando Valley E. Rev 53,500 40 0.1%

San Fernando Valley Santa Clarita Valley Rev 51,900 140 0.3%

Antelope Valley San Fernando Valley Int 35,100 1,410 4.0%

Central L.A. / Burbank Santa Clarita Valley Rev 26,900 140 0.5%

Antelope Valley Central L.A. / Burbank Pk 23,396 2,750 11.8%

Antelope Valley Santa Clarita Valley Int 22,300 570 2.6%

San Fernando Valley Antelope Valley Rev 7,300 30 0.4%

Santa Clarita Valley Antelope Valley Rev 6,700 70 1.0%

Central L.A. / Burbank Antelope Valley Rev 2,000 10 0.5%


99

B. Daily Trips Between Catchment Zones – All Modes*



1010

B. Daily Metrolink AVL Trips Between Catchment Zones



1111

B. Commuter Rail Shares of Total Daily Trips

Source: SCAG daily trip data for 2012, from regional travel demand modelSource: SCAG daily trip data for 2012, from regional travel demand model


1212

C. Service Scenario Components

1. What is a service scenario?

a) Essentially a train timetable

b) Service patterns driven by travel market demand

c) Reflects physical and operational constraints

2. Components

a) Service types and stopping patterns

i. Service frequency – peak, reverse-peak and off-peak

ii. Local, express and limited patterns

iii. Regularity of service intervals

b) Rail infrastructure configuration (track, signal, structures, ROW)

c) Stations, including multi-modal connectivity

d) Rolling stock fleet and storage/maintenance facilities


1313

C. Service Components Considered

Regularized Clockface Schedules

1. Benefits

a) Convenient for riders

b) Supports regional and state-wide coordinated rail network

c) Promotes multi-modal connectivity

d) Makes efficient use of rail infrastructure capacity

2. Issues and Impacts

a) Extensive single track constrains flexibility with respect to future train schedules and trip time improvements

b) Changes the nature of rail freight operations


1414

1. Benefits

a) Shorter trip time to downtown L.A. and points beyond downtown

b) Passenger benefit increases with trip length

2. Issues and Impacts

a) Some intermediate stations and markets not served

b) Intra-line and multi-modal connectivity is more challenging

c) Expensive to develop on largely single-track line with bi-directional operations


Peak Express Service


1515


Rolling Stock Options

1. Options

a) Continuation of diesel locomotive train-sets

b) Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU)

c) Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) – including future HSR-compatible

2. Issues

a) Passenger capacity

b) Operational performance (acceleration and braking, with steep grades)

c) Operating and maintenance costs

d) Platform heights and ADA accessibility


1616

D. Service Scenario Development


1717


1. Service Planning Principlesa) Verify physical and operational feasibility

b) Provide for safe and reliable service

c) Make efficient use of infrastructure capacity

d) Build towards consistency with State Rail Plan

e) Distribute benefits equitably among markets within the AVL corridor

f) Seek solutions that are mutually beneficial in locations where other operators will use or adjoin the AVL

g) Preserve flexibility to account for future uncertainty


1818


Scenarios Considered:

1. Hourly bi-directional service only

2. Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back

3. Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back, full-length express service, and bunched outer-zone trains

4. Semi-hourly bi-directional with intermediate turn-back, full-length express service, and spread-out outer-zone trains

5. Same as (4), with intermediate turns at Sylmar instead of Vista Canyon

*These scenarios are consistent with levels and types of rail service included in the State Rail Plan

*

*

*


1919

Existing ServiceExisting Service:

Weekdays: Total of 30 Trips

Full-Corridor Trips: 18

Partial Corridor Trips: 10

Express Trips: 2 (1 SB Peak, 1 NB Peak)

Headways: Variable, 26 minutes to 2 ½ hours between trains

Estimated Capital and Operating Cost:

Est. Capital Cost: $0

Est. Operating Cost Increase over current service: $0

Capital Projects Required:

No. of Capital Projects Required: 0


2020

Scenario 1 – Hourly Service OnlyScenario 1 – Hourly Service Only:



Partial Corridor Trips: 0

Express Trips: 0

Headways: 60 minutes between trains all day


Est. Capital Cost: $41.8 M*

Est. Annual Operating Cost Increase over current service: $3.1 M**



*Expressed in millions of 2018 dollars**Expressed in millions of 2017 dollars.


2121

Scenario 1 Capacity Infrastructure Projects Balboa Double Track Extension

7


2222

Scenario 2 – 30-60Scenario 2 - 30-60:



Partial Corridor Trips (Via Princessa): 4

Express Trips: 0

Headways: 30 minutes in peak period, peak direction, hourly rest of day


Est. Capital Cost above Scen. 1: $141.8 M*

Est. Annual Operating Cost Increase over Scenario 1 service: $2.3 M**





2323

Scenario 2 Capacity Infrastructure Projects

1

10

Lancaster Terminal Improvements Canyon-Santa Clarita Siding Extension Balboa Double Track Extension Brighton-McGinley Double Track

5

7


2424

Scenario 3 – 3-Hourly PatternsScenario 3 – 3-Hourly Patterns:




Express Trips: 4

Headways: 30 minutes + express trains in peak, peak direction, hourly rest of day


Est. Capital Cost over Scen. 2: $158.7 M*






2525


3

46

Lancaster Terminal Improvements Acton Siding Extension Via Princessa-Honby Siding Extension Canyon-Santa Clarita Siding Extension Hood-Saugus Double Track Balboa Double Track Extension Sylmar-Roxford Double Track Brighton-McGinley Double Track

7

10

5

1

8


2626





Express Trips: 4 (Improved intervals bet. Express and Local trains)



Est. Capital Cost over Scen. 2: $236.6 M*



No. of Capital Projects Required: 7*Expressed in millions of 2018 dollars**Expressed in millions of 2017 dollars.


2727

Scenario 4 Capacity Infrastructure Projects Lancaster Terminal Improvements Palmdale North Double Track Ravenna South Siding Canyon-Santa Clarita Siding Extension Balboa Double Track Extension Sheldon-Van Nuys Blvd. Double Track Brighton-McGinley Double Track

7

10

5

1

3

9

2


2828




Partial Corridor Trips (Sylmar): 8

Express Trips: 4 (Improved intervals bet. Express and Local trains)



Est. Capital Cost over Scen 2: $236.6 M*






2929


3

8

Lancaster Terminal Improvements Palmdale North Double Track Ravenna South Siding Canyon-Santa Clarita Siding Extension Balboa Double Track Extension Sylmar Station Improvements Sheldon-Van Nuys Blvd. Double Track Brighton-McGinley Double Track

9

2

7

10

5

1


3030

C. Capital and Operating Cost

Scenario Characteristics Capital Cost

($M 2018)

Incremental Operating Cost Above

Existing($M 2017)

1. Hourly Hourly Local Service, LA Union Station to Lancaster

$42 $3.1

2. 30-60 Hourly Svc, LA Union Station-Lancaster30-Min Svc, LA Union Station-Vista Cyn

$184 $5.4

3. Three Patterns Bunched Exp & Lcl in Antelope ValleyVista Canyon Intermediate Turn-back

$342 $9.3

4. Three Patterns Evenly Spaced Trains in Antelope ValleyVista Canyon Intermediate Turn-back

$420 $8.3

5. Three Patterns Evenly Spaced Trains in Antelope Valley Sylmar Intermediate Turn-back

$420 $9.4


3131

D. Service Scenario Analysis – Tradeoffs

Maximizing value for limited initial investment

1. Which travel markets should benefit first?a) Maximize ridership vs. distribute benefits equitably

2. Should express service include intermediate stops?a) Faster trip time (fewer stops) vs. better connectivity and service to

intermediate markets (more stops)

3. Which stations should be developed as major hubs?a) E.g., Palmdale, Santa Clarita, Sylmar, Hollywood Burbank Airport

4. Near-term benefit vs. future flexibilitya) Limit near-term investments to projects that support multiple future

scenarios; avoid scenario-specific projects


3232

D. Service Scenario Analysis – Future-Proofing

1. Looking Beyond the Immediate Incremental Investment Timeframe

a) The Antelope Valley Line doesn’t exist in a vacuum

b) Near-term investment decisions should be made with an awareness of future network visions and associated risks and opportunities

2. Rationale for “Future-Proofing”

a) Verifies robustness of interim infrastructure projects

b) Demonstrates long-term utility of interim investments

c) Identifies opportunities for transportation network benefits and cost-effective investment at a scale beyond the AVL

d) Protects future flexibility for AVL service

e) Identifies future choices and tradeoffsAppendix 3. PowerPoint Presentation to Stakeholders, December 12, 2018

3333

D. Service Scenario Analysis – Future-Proofing

1. AVL as a component of integrated regional raila) Connection opportunities with Link-US

2. Burbank-LAUS service mix and train volumesa) LOSSAN Corridor, Ventura County Line, local transit service along AVL

3. Future rolling stock mixa) Construct longer sidings to accommodate a range of rolling stock

4. Future freight service

5. East San Fernando Valley transit line

6. CA HSR and Intercity Rail Service to Las Vegas


3434

High Desert Corridorto Las Vegas

HSR on the AVL – Palmdale-to-Burbank

Track Realignment and Potential

Track Connection, Palmdale South

Palmdale Hub

Potential Trip Time Improvements

Palmdale to LAUS

LAUS to Palmdale

Existing service 1:59 2:04

Scenario 1 or 2Local Train

1:50 1:56

Scenario 3, 4 or 5Express Train

1:41 1:45

Potential Curve Modifications

1:39 1:41Appendix 3. PowerPoint Presentation to Stakeholders, December 12, 2018

3535

High Desert Corridorto Las Vegas

HSR and AVL – Palmdale-to-Burbank

Potential Track Connection, CP Soledad

Tunnel 25

Tunnels 18 & 19 andSoledad Canyon Rd Bridge

AVL & HSR Parallel Running

AVL & HSR Parallel Running

Track Realignment and Potential

Track Connection, Palmdale South

Palmdale Hub

Burbank Airport Hub

Potential Track ConnectionVertical Clearance ConstraintAVL & HSR Parallel Running SegmentsHSR Stations / AVL/Transit Hubs


3636

1. Overall Evaluation Categories

a) Operations (35%)• Metrics: Increase in trains per day, travel time improvement; compatibility

with local transit networks; supports long-term service level increases

b) Regional Connectivity (25%)• Metrics: Increase in train stops per station; synchs with connections in

LAUS, Palmdale, Burbank Airport North; estimated increase in mode share

c) Costs and Financial Performance (20%)• Metrics: Estimated capital cost increase; percent increase in annual

operating cost

d) ROW Impacts (10%)• Metrics: Extent of ROW acquisitions reqd.; mitigatable property impacts;

impacts on sensitive areas or communities

e) Applied Technology (10%)• Metrics: VMT reductions; support for cleaner vehicle technology; support

for HSR

E. Evaluation Methodology


3737

2. Methodology

a) Evaluation Criteria under each category

• Criteria share the total weight applied to each category area

b) Metric/Measure

• Values for each metric under each scenario calculated or estimated, assigned a score of 100 to 300 points

c) Weighting Process

• All criteria within each category area assigned a weight of “1” for purposes of the Stage 1 Service Evaluation

E. Evaluation Methodology (continued)


3838

Breakout Sessions


3939

Prioritization Exercise Objectives

1. Identify the market factors and service characteristics that distinguish the service scenarios

2. Evaluate the five service scenarios – in two ways

a) Prioritize the potential markets to be served by the AVL and evaluate the scenarios in terms of the extent to which they benefit high-priority markets

b) Prioritize the service characteristics of the scenarios in terms of their benefit to high-priority markets and evaluate the performance of the scenarios

3. Inform the development of capital investment priorities


4040

Discussion Results


4141

Breakout Session Summary and Notes

Breakout groups report on their prioritization discussions

1. - Record group input

2. -

3. -

4. -

5. -

6. -


4242

Study Schedule


4343

Next Steps

1. Meeting summary

2. Incorporate feedback from stakeholders

3. Continue evaluation process

4. Refine the capital projects

5. Identify Total costs and funding opportunities

6. Return to stakeholders with draft findings

7. Finalize the report


4444

Thank You


7 Attachments



APPENDIX 2 – ATTACHMENT 4 Evaluation Matrices for Service Scenario Evaluation

6. Appendix

Antelope Valle Line Study

Appendix 4. Evaluation Matrices for Service Scenario Evaluation Draft Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios

Stage 1 Evaluation Categories


Overall Category Weight Evaluation Criteria Metric/Measure

1 Operations 35%

Capacity Improvement Percent increase in trains per hour or per day

Travel Time Improvement Average percent reduction in overall train trip time (wait time plus on-board time)



Flexibility for Future Growth in Long Term Assessment of support for long-term service level increases

Quality of the Passenger Experience General assessment of the overall improvement in service frequency, multi-modal connectivity, amenities, on-time performance

Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns Pass/fail assessment based on service plan slot schedule


25%

Travel Markets Served Percent Increase in number of train trip stops at AVL stations (or station pairs)

Multimodal Connectivity Headway/Travel Pattern synchs or can be made to synch with local transit operators

Regional Network Connectivity Headway/trip pattern synchs with SCORE program connections in LAUS, Palmdale, Burbank Airport North

Rail Mode Share Potential Projected Percent Increase in corridor mode share


20% Total Capital Cost ROM Capital cost using high-level cost factors for # of miles of double-track, bridges, etc.


Percent increase in annual AVL operating cost based on % increase in train miles

4 ROW Impacts 10%

Right-of-Way Takes Extent of ROW acquisition required from UPRR or other ROW owners

Indirect Property (noise barriers, etc.) Extent to which impacts to adjacent properties can be mitigated (i.e., with noise barriers, landscaping)

Sensitive Areas (historic, endangered species, etc.) Extent to which proposed construction affects sensitive areas or communities (including natural, cultural, and community resources


10%

VMT Reduction Number of vehicular miles travelled reduced (1000's)



Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail Extent to which the service and infrastructure plan supports future development of HSR in the corridor

Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities


6. Appendix


Draft Task 4: Modeling and Evaluation of Initial Service Scenarios Appendix 4. Evaluation Matrices for Service Scenario Evaluation

Capacity Improvement (Operations Category)

Category Number

Category Overall Category

Weight Evaluation Criteria Metric/Measure

1 Operations 35% Capacity Improvement Percent increase in trains per day

Score Breakdown

Percent increase in trains per day Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

14% or less 100

15% to 19% 150

20% to 24% 200

25% to 29% 250

30% or more 300

Evaluation Table

Existing Weekday Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Trains per day 30 30 34 38 38 42

Difference 0 4 8 8 12

Percent Increase 0% 13% 27% 27% 40%

Score based on breakdown 100 100 250 250 300

Sub-Criteria’s Score Summary


Metric/Measure 0% 13% 27% 27% 40%

Score (100-300) 100 100 250 250 300

6. Appendix



Travel Time Improvement (Operations Category)

Category Number



1 Operations 35% Travel Time Improvement Average percent reduction in overall train trip time to existing service wait time plus on-board time

Score Breakdown

Average percent reduction in overall train trip time Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

Less than/or 9% 100

10% - 11% 150

12% - 13% 200

14% - 15% 250

16% or more 300

Supplemental Evaluation

Service Scenario

Existing Condition Average trip time in

vehicle full length trips only

Average wait time between vehicles

Scenario’s Average trip time in vehicle (full-

length trips only)

Scenario's Average wait time between

Vehicles (all trips all stops)

Total travel time savings

Existing Condition’s total travel time

Average percent reduction in overall

train trip time

a b c d e = (a+b)-(c+d) f = a+b g = e/f

1 2:10:27 1:13:19 1:59:00 1:00:00 0:24:46 3:23:46 12%

2 2:10:27 1:13:19 1:59:00 0:54:12 0:30:34 3:23:46 15%

3 2:10:27 1:13:19 1:59:00 0:51:48 0:32:58 3:23:46 16%

4 2:10:27 1:13:19 1:59:00 0:51:25 0:33:21 3:23:46 16%

5 2:10:27 1:13:19 1:59:00 0:51:20 0:33:26 3:23:46 16%

6. Appendix



Travel Time Improvement (Con’t) (Operations Category)

Evaluation Table


Travel Time Improvement 0:24:46 0:30:34 0:32:58 0:33:21 0:33:26

Average percent reduction in overall train trip time to existing service wait time plus on-board time.

12% 15% 16% 16% 16%


Sub-Category’s Score Summary


Metric/Measure 12% 15% 16% 16% 16%

Score (100-300) 200 250 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Compatibility with Local Transit and Development Plans (Operations Category)

Category Number



1 Operations 35% Compatibility with Local Transit and Development Plans


Score Breakdown

Consistency with plans Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

High 300

Medium 200

Low 100


Supplemental research was completed to determine quantitative and qualitative factors for transit and development plans for each AVL station: new housing units, additional commercial space, new transit corridor projects, TOD Plans, etc. As well, calculations to determine the number of new trains stops per AVL station per service scenario. See 4.1.1 Evaluation Criteria Categories and Sub-Criteria for a more detailed methodology.

Evaluation Table



Low Medium High High High




Metric/Measure Low Medium High High High

Score (100-300) 100 200 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Flexibility For Growth (Operations Category)

Category Number



1 Operations 35% Flexibility for Future Growth in Long Term

Assessment of support for long-term service level increases

Score Breakdown

Assessment of support for long-term service level Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

High 300

Medium 200

Low 100

Evaluation Table


Infrastructure Improvements Low Medium High High High

Ability to synchronize with future service; HSR, HDC,

Low Low High High High

Flexibility to schedule service around the constraints of Tunnel 25

High High Medium Low High

Metric/Measure Medium Medium High High High


6. Appendix



Flexibility For Growth (Con’t) (Operations Category)


Infrastructure Improvements


Low Medium High High High

1 New project - not so flexible

4 New project - Somewhat flexible

8 New project - Really flexible



Ability to synchronize with future service; HSR, HDC,


• No express service • Less capacity for other services • Less connections at Palmdale

• No express service • Less capacity for other services • Less connections at Palmdale

• Express service • More capacity for other services • More connections at Palmdale & Sylmar



Flexibility to schedule service around the constraints of Tunnel 25

High High Medium Low High

Schedule has flexibility around Tunnel 25


The spacing between trains approaching Tunnel 25 is not flexible

The tigh spacing between trains around Tunnel 25 are a cause of reliability concern, and prohibit flexibility.




Metric/Measure Medium Medium High High High

Score (100-300) 200 200 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Quality of the Passenger Experience (Operations Category)

Category Number



1 Operations 35% Quality of the Passenger Experience General assessment of the overall improvement in service frequency, multi-modal connectivity, amenities, on-time performance

Score Breakdown

Overall Improvements Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

High 300

Medium 200

Low 100

Evaluation Table


Improvement in Service Frequency Low Low Medium Medium High

Running time - Express Service Available Low Low High High High

Metric/Measure Low Low Medium Medium High


6. Appendix



Quality of the Passenger Experience (Con’t) (Operations Category)


Service Scenario Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Improvement in Service Frequency 0% 13% 27% 27% 40%

Low Low Medium Medium High

Running time - Express Service Available No No Yes Yes Yes




Metric/Measure Low Low Medium Medium High

Score (100-300) 100 100 200 200 300

6. Appendix



Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns (Operations Category)

Category Number



1 Operations 35% Compatibility with Clockface Schedule Patterns

Assessment based on service plan slot schedule

Score Breakdown

Number of trains stops in clock-face intervals Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

149 or less 100

150 or 159 150

160 to 169 200

170 to 179 250

180 or more 300

Evaluation Table

Minutes Existing Weekday Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

60 12 168 150 152 146 147

30 8 0 32 19 14 11

15 4 0 0 6 1 1

Number of trains stops in clock-face intervals 24 168 182 177 161 159

Score based on breakdown N/A 150 300 250 200 150



Metric/Measure 168 182 177 161 159

Score (100-300) 150 300 250 200 150

6. Appendix



Travel Markets Served (Regional Connectivity Category)

Category Number




25% Travel Markets Served Percent Increase in number of train trip stops at AVL stations (or station pairs)

Score Breakdown

Percent Increase Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

19% or less 100

20% to 24% 150

25% to 29% 200

30% to 34% 250

35% or more 300

Evaluation Table


# Train Stops 314 360 396 420 420 432

Difference 46 82 106 106 118

% Increase 15% 26% 34% 34% 38%




Metric/Measure 15% 26% 34% 34% 38%

Score (100-300) 100 200 250 250 300

6. Appendix



Multimodal Connectivity (Regional Connectivity Category)

Category Number




25% Multimodal Connectivity Headway/Travel Pattern synchs or can be made to synch with local transit operators.

Score Breakdown

Metric/Measure Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

100 or less 100

110 to 119 150

120 to 129 200

130 to 139 250

140 or more 300

Evaluation Table


Number of additional train trips served by lines with a headways pattern that synch with local transit operators service.

94 108 136 136 146


6. Appendix



Multimodal Connectivity (Con’t) (Regional Connectivity Category)


Station

Bus Line Frequency - Peak Period Only

SUM 60 Mins 30 Mins 15 Mins 10 Mins

Sun Valley 2 1 2 0 5

Sylmar/San Fernando 1 1 2 1 5

Newhall 0 6 0 0 6

Santa Clarita 0 0 0 0 0

Via Princessa 0 1 0 0 1

Vincent Grande/Acton 0 0 0 0 0

Palmdale 2 1 0 0 3

Lancaster 2 1 0 0 3

Number of new stops per station


Lancaster 6 6 8 8 8

Palmdale 5 5 7 7 7




Newhall 1 3 3 3 1





Metric/Measure 94 108 136 136 146

Score (100-300) 100 150 250 250 300

6. Appendix



Regional Network Connectivity (Regional Connectivity Category)

Category Number




25% Regional Network Connectivity Headway/trip pattern synchs with SCORE program connections in LAUS, Palmdale, Burbank Airport North

Score Breakdown

Number of trains with intervals of less than 30 minutes Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

0 to 14 100

15 to 29 200

30 or more 300

Evaluation Table


90+ 29 0 0 0 0 0

60 - 90 48 0 0 0 0 0

30 - 60 55 168 162 166 160 170

15 - 30 10 0 24 18 34 31

0 - 15 3 0 0 14 4 3

Total number of trains with intervals of less than 30 minutes

0 24 32 38 34




Metric/Measure 0 24 32 38 34

Score (100-300) 100 200 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Rail Mode Share Potential (Regional Connectivity Category)

Category Number




25% Rail Mode Share Potential Projected Percent Increase in ridership on the AVL.

Score Breakdown

Ridership Increase Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

0% to 3% 100

4% to 7% 150

8% to 11% 200

12% to 15% 250

16% or more 300

Evaluation Table


Daily Revenue Hours 60:45:00 65:05:00 72:33:00 70:41:00 72:45:00

Daily Rev. Hr increase from existing weekday service. 5:55:00 10:15:00 17:43:00 15:51:00 17:55:00

Percent Increase of daily revenue hours from existing weekday service. 11% 19% 32% 29% 33%

Expected Ridership based on projected percent increase daily revenue hours. 6,156 6,387 6,785 6,685 6,795

Ridership increase using %50 ratio service to ridership. 315 546 944 844 954

Projected Percent Increase in ridership on the AVL. 5% 9% 16% 14% 16%




Metric/Measure 5% 9% 16% 14% 16%

Score (100-300) 150 200 300 250 300

6. Appendix



Total Capital Cost (Costs and Financial Performance Category)

Category Number



3 Costs and Financial

Performance

20% Total Capital Cost ROM Capital cost using high-level cost factors for # of miles of double-track, bridges, etc.

Score Breakdown

Total ROW Capital Cost

(In millions)

Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

$300 or more 100

$100 to $200 200

$100 or less 300

Evaluation Table


Total ROM Capital Cost $41,800,000 $175,200,000 $328,900,000 $428,600,000 $448,700,000

Total ROW Capital Cost (In millions) $42 $175 $329 $429 $449




Metric/Measure $41,800,000 $175,200,000 $328,900,000 $428,600,000 $448,700,000

Score (100-300) 300 200 100 100 100

6. Appendix



Costs and Financial Performance (Costs and Financial Performance Category)

Category Number



3 Costs and Financial

Performance

20% Relative Impact on Annual Operating Cost of AVL service

Increase in annual AVL operating cost based on % increase in train miles

Score Breakdown

Increase in operation cost (In Millions) Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

$8.0 or more 100

$7.0 to $7.9 150

$6.0 to $6.9 200

$5.0 to $5.9 250

$4.9 or less 300

Evaluation Table


Increase in annual AVL operating cost based on % increase in train miles

$3,103,000 $5,373,000 $9,288,000 $8,308,000 $9,393,000

(In millions) $3.1 $5.4 $9.3 $8.3 $9.4




Metric/Measure $3,103,000 $5,373,000 $9,288,000 $8,308,000 $9,393,000

Score (100-300) 300 250 100 100 100

6. Appendix



Right-of-Way (ROW) Impacts (Right-of-Way Takes Category)

Category Number



4 ROW Impacts 10% Right-of-Way Takes Extent of ROW acquisition required from UPRR or other ROW owners

Score Breakdown

Total SF of ROW Takes Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

0 SF 300

1 SF to 100,000 SF 200

100,001 SF or more 100

Evaluation Table


Total SF of ROW Takes 0 76300 76300 139660 139660



Project Property Purpose Parcel No. Length Width Total SF

Lancaster South Train Storage Area 1

1,154

55 63,470

Lancaster South Access Track/Turnout 2

135

30 4,050

Lancaster South Access Lead 3

130

30 3,900

Project Total 71,420

Palmdale North Second Track 1

1,584

40 63,360

Project Total 63,360

Santa Clarita Station Second Platform 1 122 40 4,880

Project Total 4,880

6. Appendix



ROW Impacts (Con’t) (Right-of-Way Takes Category)


Capital Projects Scenario

MP Location

Project Track-feet Description Right-of-Way Takes in Sq Ft


Total SF of ROW Takes 0

76,300

76,300

139,660

139,660

-76.6 Lancaster Terminal -- 6 trainsets

3,440

Station and yard improvements (scope?)

71,420

X X

-76.6 Lancaster Terminal -- 8 trainsets

4,300

New double track and second station platform face, plus three new 1,000' storage tracks

71,420

X X

68.5-72.0 Palmdale North

18,480

New double track and 2 platform tracks at station (integrated with HSR)

63,360 X X

33.4-35.0 Canyon-Sta. Clarita

8,448

Extend existing siding (new double track)

4,880 X X X X



Metric/Measure 0 76,300 76,300 139,660 139,660

Score (100-300) 300 200 200 100 100

6. Appendix



Indirect Property Impacts (ROW Impacts Category)

Category Number



4 ROW Impacts 10% Indirect Property (noise barriers, etc.)


Score Breakdown


No Impacts 300

Impacts to adjacent properties 100

Evaluation Table


Approximate linear feet of affected property 0 0 2,550 0 0

Impacts to adjacent properties No No Yes No No



The approximate linear feet of affected property were determined for all the capital projects required for each scenario. It was determined that only segments of the Hood-Saugus (connect sidings and convert to double track) and Sylmar-Roxford (second track at station) capital projects require a sounds wall or other mitigation. Only Service scenario 3 requires these two projects.



Metric/Measure No No Yes No No

Score (100-300) 300 300 100 300 300

6. Appendix



Sensitive Areas (ROW Impacts Category)

Category Number



4 ROW Impacts 10% Sensitive Areas (historic, endangered species, etc.)

Extent to which proposed construction affects sensitive areas or communities (including natural, cultural, and community resources

Score Breakdown


High 300

Medium 200

Low 100

Evaluation Table


Drainage Low Medium Medium High High

Bridges Low Low High High High

Earthwork Low Medium Medium High High

Metric/Measure Low Medium Medium High High


6. Appendix



Sensitive Areas ((Con’t) (ROW Impacts Category)

Supplemental Evaluation N

umbe

r of P

roje

cts


Drainage 0 12 20 32 32

Low Medium Medium High High

Bridges 0 0 4 4 4


Earthwork 2 4 4 11 11

Low Medium Medium High High



Metric/Measure Low Medium Medium High High

Score (100-300) 300 200 200 100 100

6. Appendix



VMT Reduction (Applied Technology Category)

Category Number




10% VMT Reduction Number of vehicular miles travelled reduced (1000's)

Score Breakdown

Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

Less than 30,000 100

30,000 to 40,000 150

40,000 to 50,000 200

50,000 to 60,000 250

More than 60,000 300

Evaluation Table


Daily Revenue Hours 60:45:00 65:05:00 72:33:00 70:41:00 72:45:00

Daily Rev. Hr increase from existing weekday service

5:55:00 10:15:00 17:43:00 15:51:00 17:55:00

Percent Increase of daily revenue hours from existing weekday service

10.8% 18.7% 32.3% 28.9% 32.7%

Ridership increase using %50 ratio service to ridership

315 546 944 844 954

Expected Ridership based on projected percent increase daily revenue hours

6,156 6,387 6,785 6,685 6,795

Weekday miles reduced 22,563 39,089 67,563 60,444 68,325


6. Appendix



VMT Reduction (Con’t) (Applied Technology Category)


Existing Weekday

Daily Revenue Hours 54:50:00

AVL Ridership 5,841

Average trip length in miles 36



Metric/Measure 22,563 39,089 67,563 60,444 68,325

Score (100-300) 100 150 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Clean Vehicle Technology (Applied Technology Category)

Category Number




10% Clean Vehicle Technology (e.g., DMUs, Electrification)


Score Breakdown

Supports cleaner vehicle technology Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

Yes 300

No 100

Evaluation Table


Number of trains that exceeds the capacity crush load of 450 passengers

1 1 1 1 1

Number of trains with # of passengers greater than 75% of the 450 passengers capacity of DMUs.

1 1 1 1 1

Metric/Measure Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes




Metric/Measure Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Score (100-300) 300 300 300 300 300

6. Appendix



Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail (Applied Technology Category)

Category Number




10% Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail


Score Breakdown


High 300

Medium 200

Low 100

Evaluation Table


Service Frequency Low Medium Medium Medium High

Infrastructure Improvements Low Low Low Low Low

Potential for express service Low Low High High High

Metric/Measure Low Medium Medium Medium High


6. Appendix



Compatibility with Future High Speed Rail (Con’t) (Applied Technology Category)


Service Frequency

Low Medium Medium Medium High

Lower connectivity potential and frequent clockface compatibility

Good connectivity at Palmdale with more additional train stops and clockface frequency



Good connectivity at Palmdale with more additional train stops and 1/2 service at peak hours.

Infrastructure Improvements

Low Low Low Low Low

Current infrastructure improvements do not electrify the ROW necessary to run HSR service





Potential for express service


No slots to run express service

No slots to run express service

Express service slots can be accommodated





Metric/Measure Low Medium Medium Medium High

Score (100-300) 100 200 200 200 300

6. Appendix



Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities (Applied Technology Category)

Category Number




10% Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities


Score Breakdown

# of New Stations multiplied by the # of Communities Sub-Category Score (100 - 300)

29 or less 100

30 to 59 150

60 to 89 200

90 to 119 250

120 or more 300

Evaluation Table


# New Stops 13 19 25 25 27

# of New Stations multiplied by the # of Communities

59 89 119 119 141


6. Appendix



Serves DAC s and Low Income Households/ Communities (Con’t) (Applied Technology Category)


Station # of Disadvantage

Communities

Communities with 75%+ of

Population in Poverty

Total Communities

Sunvalley 6 1

7

Sylmar/San Fernando 3 3 6

Newhall 0 2 2

Santa Clarita 0 0 0

Via Princessa 0 0 0

Vincent Grande/Acton 0 0 0

Palmdale 1 3 4

Lancaster 0 5 5

Number of new stops per station


Lancaster 6 6 8 8 8

Palmdale 5 5 7 7 7




Newhall 1 3 3 3 1





Metric/Measure 59 89 119 119 141

Score (100-300) 150 200 250 250 300

7 Attachments



APPENDIX 2 – ATTACHMENT 5 Revised Scenario Headway Sheets

ANTELOPE VALLEY LINE STUDY Contract No. PS-2415-3024-03

February 11, 2019 Stakeholders Meeting Draft Service Scenarios 1 - 6

Prepared for:

Los Angeles County

Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Prepared by:

444 South Flower Street

Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90071

SCENARIO 1: Late Evening Train - Existing Peak and Mid-Day Service plus 1 Late Night Trip

INBOUND: LANCASTER - L.A. UNION STATION

Train number 200 202 204 282 206 208 210 212 214 216 218 220 222 224 226 1230

LANCASTER 3:44 4:46 5:16 5:58 6:48 9:01 11:35 13:45 18:17

PALMDALE 3:54 4:56 5:26 6:01 6:08 6:58 9:11 11:45 13:55 18:26 19:35

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 4:06 5:08 5:38 | 6:21 7:10 9:23 11:57 14:07 18:39 19:47

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | |

VIA PRINCESSA 4:42 5:44 6:15 | 6:56 7:48 9:05 9:59 11:26 12:34 13:51 14:43 15:25 19:25 20:52

SANTA CLARITA 4:48 5:50 6:21 6:49 7:02 7:55 9:11 10:05 11:32 12:40 13:57 14:49 15:32 17:11 19:31 20:58

NEWHALL # 4:56 5:58 6:29 | 7:10 8:02 9:19 10:13 11:40 12:48 14:05 15:03 15:40 17:19 19:46 21:05

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO o 5:10 6:12 6:44 7:13 7:27 8:19 9:34 10:31 11:55 13:04 14:19 15:16 15:54 17:33 19:59 21:19

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 5:11 6:13 6:45 7:14 7:28 8:20 9:35 10:32 11:56 13:06 14:20 15:17 15:56 17:35 20:00 21:20

SUN VALLEY 5:18 6:20 6:56 | 7:36 8:27 9:43 10:40 12:04 13:14 14:29 15:25 16:05 17:43 20:13 21:28

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:22 6:24 7:00 | 7:40 8:31 9:47 10:44 12:08 13:18 14:33 15:29 16:10 17:47 20:17 21:32

BURBANK # 5:28 6:30 7:05 7:25 7:45 8:37 9:52 10:49 12:13 13:23 14:38 15:35 16:21 17:52 20:22 21:37

GLENDALE # 5:34 6:36 7:12 | 7:51 8:43 9:59 10:56 12:20 13:30 14:45 15:41 16:28 17:59 20:29 21:43

L.A. UNION STATION o 5:53 6:55 7:25 7:44 8:06 8:57 10:13 11:08 12:34 13:43 15:01 15:55 16:41 18:14 20:42 21:54

2:09:00 2:09:00 2:09:00 1:43:00 2:08:00 2:09:00 1:08:00 2:07:00 1:08:00 2:08:00 1:10:00 2:10:00 1:16:00 1:03:00 2:25:00 2:19:00 29:21:00

OUTBOUND: L.A. UNION STATION - LANCASTER

Train number 201 203 205 207 209 211 213 215 217 219 285 221 223 225 227 1235

L.A. UNION STATION 6:19 7:29 8:29 9:42 11:06 11:58 13:55 15:28 15:50 16:44 17:32 17:58 18:38 19:36 21:25 22:30

GLENDALE # 6:31 7:41 8:41 9:54 11:18 12:10 14:07 15:40 16:02 16:56 | 18:10 18:50 19:48 21:37 22:41

BURBANK # 6:38 7:49 8:48 10:01 11:25 12:18 14:14 15:48 16:09 17:04 17:48 18:18 18:57 19:55 21:44 22:48

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 6:44 7:55 8:54 10:07 11:31 12:24 14:20 15:54 16:16 17:10 | 18:23 19:03 20:01 21:50 22:53

SUN VALLEY 6:49 7:59 8:59 10:12 11:36 12:29 14:25 15:58 16:21 17:14 | 18:28 19:08 20:06 21:54 22:58

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO o 6:59 8:07 9:07 10:20 11:44 12:37 14:35 16:08 16:29 17:23 18:04 18:36 19:16 20:14 22:02 23:06

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 7:01 8:08 9:08 10:21 11:45 12:38 14:36 16:10 16:30 17:24 18:05 18:37 19:17 20:15 22:03 23:07

NEWHALL # 7:19 8:26 9:24 10:40 12:03 12:54 14:51 16:25 16:45 17:42 | 18:53 19:32 20:30 22:18 23:22

SANTA CLARITA 7:26 8:33 9:32 10:48 12:11 13:02 15:00 16:32 16:52 17:49 18:25 19:00 19:43 20:38 22:26 23:29

VIA PRINCESSA 7:33 8:42 9:40 10:56 12:18 13:12 15:06 16:39 17:56 | 19:07 19:50 20:45 22:33 23:36

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | |

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 8:12 10:24 12:59 17:17 18:35 | 19:49 20:28 21:23 23:11 0:16

PALMDALE 8:22 10:35 13:10 17:28 18:49 19:21 20:00 20:39 21:34 23:22 0:27

LANCASTER o 8:35 10:46 13:20 17:41 18:58 20:12 20:54 21:49 23:37 0:35 2:16:00 1:13:00 2:17:00 1:14:00 2:14:00 1:14:00 1:11:00 2:13:00 1:02:00 2:14:00 1:49:00 2:14:00 2:16:00 2:13:00 2:12:00 2:05:00 29:57:00

= Express Trains Total Service Hours 59:18:00

= Late Night Train Service



METROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINEFor Discussion Purposes Only1

5. Revised Scenario Headway Sheets - Feb 2019 Appendix 5 Pg 1

SCENARIO 2: Two Additional Off-Peak Round Trips - Existing Peak Service


Train number 200 200 204 282 206 206 4210 2212 3214 2216 3218 2220 3222 2224 2226 4228 206 1230

LANCASTER 3:44 4:46 5:16 5:58 6:48 7:46 9:04 11:04 13:04 15:04 16:04 17:11 18:17

PALMDALE 3:54 4:56 5:26 6:01 6:08 6:58 7:55 9:14 11:14 13:14 15:14 16:14 17:20 18:26 19:35

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 4:06 5:08 5:38 | 6:21 7:10 8:07 9:26 11:26 13:26 15:26 16:26 17:32 18:39 19:47

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VIA PRINCESSA 4:42 5:44 6:15 | 6:56 7:48 8:46 10:04 11:04 12:04 13:04 14:04 15:04 16:04 17:04 18:11 19:25 20:52

SANTA CLARITA 4:48 5:50 6:21 6:49 7:02 7:55 8:51 10:10 11:10 12:10 13:10 14:10 15:10 16:10 17:10 18:18 19:31 20:58

NEWHALL # 4:56 5:58 6:29 | 7:10 8:02 8:59 10:18 11:18 12:18 13:18 14:18 15:18 16:18 17:18 18:26 19:46 21:05

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 5:10 6:12 6:44 7:13 7:27 8:19 9:18 10:32 11:32 12:32 13:32 14:32 15:32 16:32 17:32 18:43 19:59 21:19


SUN VALLEY 5:18 6:20 6:56 | 7:36 8:27 9:27 10:40 11:40 12:40 13:40 14:40 15:40 16:40 17:40 18:52 20:13 21:28

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:22 6:24 7:00 | 7:40 8:31 9:30 10:44 11:44 12:44 13:44 14:44 15:44 16:44 17:44 18:55 20:17 21:32

BURBANK # 5:28 6:30 7:05 7:25 7:45 8:37 9:35 10:49 11:49 12:49 13:49 14:49 15:49 16:49 17:49 19:00 20:22 21:37

GLENDALE # 5:34 6:36 7:12 | 7:51 8:43 9:42 10:55 11:56 12:55 13:56 14:55 15:56 16:55 17:55 19:07 20:29 21:43

L.A. UNION STATION 5:53 6:55 7:25 7:44 8:06 8:57 9:53 11:06 12:06 13:06 14:06 15:06 16:06 17:06 18:06 19:18 20:42 21:54 2:09:00 2:09:00 2:09:00 1:43:00 2:08:00 2:09:00 2:07:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 2:07:00 2:25:00 2:19:00 34:41:00


Train number 201 4203 4205 3207 2209 3211 2213 3215 2217 2219 5219 219 285 221 223 225 227 1235

L.A. UNION STATION 6:19 7:35 8:35 9:44 10:44 11:44 12:44 13:44 14:44 15:44 16:10 16:44 17:32 17:58 18:38 19:36 21:25 22:30

GLENDALE # 6:31 7:46 8:46 9:56 10:56 11:56 12:56 13:56 14:56 15:56 16:22 16:56 | 18:10 18:50 19:48 21:37 22:41

BURBANK # 6:38 7:53 8:53 10:03 11:03 12:03 13:03 14:03 15:03 16:03 16:30 17:04 17:48 18:18 18:57 19:55 21:44 22:48

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 6:44 7:58 8:58 10:08 11:08 12:08 13:08 14:08 15:08 16:08 16:36 17:10 | 18:23 19:03 20:01 21:50 22:53

SUN VALLEY 6:49 8:03 9:03 10:12 11:12 12:12 13:12 14:12 15:12 16:12 16:40 17:14 | 18:28 19:08 20:06 21:54 22:58



NEWHALL # 7:19 8:27 9:27 10:37 11:37 12:37 13:37 14:37 15:37 16:37 17:08 17:42 | 18:53 19:32 20:30 22:18 23:22

SANTA CLARITA 7:26 8:34 9:34 10:44 11:44 12:44 13:44 14:44 15:44 16:44 17:15 17:49 18:25 19:00 19:43 20:38 22:26 23:29

VIA PRINCESSA 7:33 8:41 9:41 10:51 11:51 12:51 13:51 14:51 15:51 16:51 17:22 17:56 | 19:07 19:50 20:45 22:33 23:36

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 8:12 9:25 10:25 12:31 14:31 16:31 17:31 18:01 18:35 | 19:49 20:28 21:23 23:11 0:16

PALMDALE 8:22 9:36 10:36 12:42 14:42 16:42 17:42 18:15 18:49 19:21 20:00 20:39 21:34 23:22 0:27

LANCASTER 8:35 9:44 10:44 12:50 14:50 16:50 17:50 18:24 18:58 20:12 20:54 21:49 23:37 0:35 2:16:00 2:09:00 2:09:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 2:14:00 2:14:00 1:49:00 2:14:00 2:16:00 2:13:00 2:12:00 2:05:00 35:36:00

= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for turn-around at Via Princessa/Vista Canyon Total Service Hours 70:17:00

= Express Trains = Late Night Train Service



For Discussion Purposes OnlyMETROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINE2


SCENARIO 3: Improved Peak Service and Semi-Hourly Off-Peak Service


Train number 200 2204 2282 2206 2284 2206 3206 2208 3208 2210 3210 2212 3212 2214 3214 2216 3216 2218 3218 2220 3220 2222 3222 2224 3224 2226 4228 206 1230 4228

Remarks AM PEAKLANCASTER 3:44 4:28 4:56 5:13 5:41 6:04 7:04 8:04 9:04 10:04 11:04 12:04 13:04 14:04 15:04 16:04 17:11 21:00

PALMDALE 3:54 4:37 5:05 5:22 5:50 6:14 7:14 8:14 9:14 10:14 11:14 12:14 13:14 14:14 15:14 16:14 17:20 18:21 19:35 21:09

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 4:06 4:49 | 5:34 | 6:26 7:26 8:26 9:26 10:26 11:26 12:26 13:26 14:26 15:26 16:26 17:32 18:34 19:47 21:21

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VIA PRINCESSA 4:42 5:26 | 6:11 | 7:04 7:34 8:04 8:34 9:04 9:34 10:04 10:34 11:04 11:34 12:04 12:34 13:04 13:34 14:04 14:34 15:04 15:34 16:04 16:34 17:04 18:11 19:23 20:52 21:59

SANTA CLARITA 4:48 5:32 5:58 6:17 6:43 7:10 7:40 8:10 8:40 9:10 9:40 10:10 10:40 11:10 11:40 12:10 12:40 13:10 13:40 14:10 14:40 15:10 15:40 16:10 16:40 17:10 18:18 19:31 20:58 22:05

NEWHALL # 4:56 5:39 | 6:24 | 7:18 7:48 8:18 8:48 9:18 9:48 10:18 10:48 11:18 11:48 12:18 12:48 13:18 13:48 14:18 14:48 15:18 15:48 16:18 16:48 17:18 18:26 19:46 21:05 22:13

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 5:10 5:52 6:17 6:37 7:02 7:32 8:02 8:32 9:02 9:32 10:02 10:32 11:02 11:32 12:02 12:32 13:02 13:32 14:02 14:32 15:02 15:32 16:02 16:32 17:02 17:32 18:43 19:59 21:19 22:30


SUN VALLEY 5:18 6:00 | 6:45 | 7:40 8:10 8:40 9:10 9:40 10:10 10:40 11:10 11:40 12:10 12:40 13:10 13:40 14:10 14:40 15:10 15:40 16:10 16:40 17:10 17:40 18:52 20:13 21:28 22:39

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:22 6:03 | 6:48 | 7:44 8:14 8:44 9:14 9:44 10:14 10:44 11:14 11:44 12:14 12:44 13:14 13:44 14:14 14:44 15:14 15:44 16:14 16:44 17:14 17:44 18:55 20:17 21:32 22:42

BURBANK # 5:28 6:07 6:30 6:52 7:15 7:49 8:19 8:49 9:19 9:49 10:19 10:49 11:19 11:49 12:19 12:49 13:19 13:49 14:19 14:49 15:19 15:49 16:19 16:49 17:19 17:49 19:00 20:22 21:37 22:47

GLENDALE # 5:34 6:13 | 6:58 | 7:55 8:26 8:55 9:26 9:55 10:26 10:55 11:26 11:55 12:26 12:55 13:26 13:55 14:26 14:55 15:26 15:55 16:26 16:55 17:26 17:55 19:07 20:29 21:43 22:54

L.A. UNION STATION 5:53 6:23 6:45 7:08 7:30 8:06 8:36 9:06 9:36 10:06 10:36 11:06 11:36 12:06 12:36 13:06 13:36 14:06 14:36 15:06 15:36 16:06 16:36 17:06 17:36 18:06 19:18 20:42 21:54 23:05 2:09:00 1:55:00 1:49:00 1:55:00 1:49:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 2:07:00 2:21:00 2:19:00 2:05:00 51:11:00


Train number 3201 2201 3203 2203 3205 2205 3207 2207 3209 2209 3211 2211 3213 2213 3215 2215 3217 2217 3219 2219 5219 2221 2263 285 221 223 225 227 1235 1237

PM PEAKL.A. UNION STATION 6:14 6:44 7:14 7:44 8:14 8:44 9:14 9:44 10:14 10:44 11:14 11:44 12:14 12:44 13:14 13:44 14:14 14:44 15:14 15:44 16:15 16:44 17:15 17:32 17:58 18:38 19:36 21:25 22:30 23:30

GLENDALE # 6:26 6:56 7:26 7:56 8:26 8:56 9:26 9:56 10:26 10:56 11:26 11:56 12:26 12:56 13:26 13:56 14:26 14:56 15:26 15:56 16:26 16:56 17:26 | 18:10 18:50 19:48 21:37 22:41 23:41

BURBANK # 6:33 7:03 7:33 8:03 8:33 9:03 9:33 10:03 10:33 11:03 11:33 12:03 12:33 13:03 13:33 14:03 14:33 15:03 15:33 16:03 16:33 17:03 17:33 17:48 18:18 18:57 19:55 21:44 22:48 23:48

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 6:38 7:08 7:38 8:08 8:38 9:08 9:38 10:08 10:38 11:08 11:38 12:08 12:38 13:08 13:38 14:08 14:38 15:08 15:38 16:08 16:39 17:08 17:38 | 18:23 19:03 20:01 21:50 22:53 23:53

SUN VALLEY 6:42 7:12 7:42 8:12 8:42 9:12 9:42 10:12 10:42 11:12 11:42 12:12 12:42 13:12 13:42 14:12 14:42 15:12 15:42 16:12 16:43 17:12 17:43 | 18:28 19:08 20:06 21:54 22:58 23:58



NEWHALL # 7:07 7:37 8:07 8:37 9:07 9:37 10:07 10:37 11:07 11:37 12:07 12:37 13:07 13:37 14:07 14:37 15:07 15:37 16:07 16:37 17:08 17:37 18:07 | 18:53 19:32 20:30 22:18 23:22 0:22

SANTA CLARITA 7:14 7:44 8:14 8:44 9:14 9:44 10:14 10:44 11:14 11:44 12:14 12:44 13:14 13:44 14:14 14:44 15:14 15:44 16:14 16:44 17:15 17:44 18:16 18:25 19:00 19:43 20:38 22:26 23:29 0:29

VIA PRINCESSA 7:21 7:51 8:21 8:51 9:21 9:51 10:21 10:51 11:21 11:51 12:21 12:51 13:21 13:51 14:21 14:51 15:21 15:51 16:21 16:51 17:22 17:51 18:23 | 19:07 19:50 20:45 22:33 23:36 0:36

VISTA CANYON | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 8:31 9:31 10:31 11:31 12:31 13:31 14:31 15:31 16:31 17:31 18:02 18:31 19:03 | 19:49 20:28 21:23 23:11 0:16 1:16

PALMDALE 8:42 9:42 10:42 11:42 12:42 13:42 14:42 15:42 16:42 17:42 18:13 18:42 19:14 19:21 20:00 20:39 21:34 23:22 0:27 1:27

LANCASTER 8:50 9:50 10:50 11:50 12:50 13:50 14:50 15:50 16:50 17:50 18:50 19:22 20:12 20:54 21:49 23:37 0:35 1:35

1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 1:07:00 2:06:00 2:07:00 1:49:00 2:14:00 2:16:00 2:13:00 2:12:00 2:05:00 2:05:00 52:24:00

= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for turn-around at Via Princessa/Vista Canyon Total Service Hours 103:35:00

= Express Trains = Late Night Train Service

METROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINEHypothetical Weekday Timetable



3


SCENARIO 4: Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service


Train number 200 250 204 252 284 208 254 286 212 256 288 216 258 220 260 224 262 228 264 232 266 236 268 240 270 244 272 248 274 252 276 256 278 260 264 266

Remarks

LANCASTER 3:25 4:25 5:15 5:25 6:15 6:25 7:15 7:25 8:25 9:25 10:25 11:25 12:25 13:25 14:25 15:25 16:25 17:25 18:25 19:25 20:25

PALMDALE 3:35 4:35 5:25 5:35 6:25 6:35 7:25 7:35 8:35 9:35 10:35 11:35 12:35 13:35 14:35 15:35 16:35 17:35 18:35 19:35 20:35

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 3:47 4:47 | 5:47 | 6:47 | 7:47 8:47 9:47 10:47 11:47 12:47 13:47 14:47 15:47 16:47 17:47 18:47 19:47 20:47

VISTA CANYON 4:23 4:54 5:23 5:54 | 6:23 6:54 | 7:23 7:54 | 8:23 8:54 9:23 9:54 10:23 10:54 11:23 11:54 12:23 12:54 13:23 13:54 14:23 14:54 15:23 15:54 16:23 16:54 17:23 17:54 18:23 18:54 19:23 20:23 21:23

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

SANTA CLARITA 4:31 5:02 5:31 6:02 6:17 6:31 7:02 7:17 7:31 8:02 8:17 8:31 9:02 9:31 10:02 10:31 11:02 11:31 12:02 12:31 13:02 13:31 14:02 14:31 15:02 15:31 16:02 16:31 17:02 17:31 18:02 18:31 19:02 19:31 20:31 21:31

NEWHALL # 4:39 5:09 5:39 6:09 | 6:39 7:09 | 7:39 8:09 | 8:39 9:09 9:39 10:09 10:39 11:09 11:39 12:09 12:39 13:09 13:39 14:09 14:39 15:09 15:39 16:09 16:39 17:09 17:39 18:09 18:39 19:09 19:39 20:39 21:39

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 4:53 5:23 5:53 6:23 6:38 6:53 7:23 7:38 7:53 8:23 8:38 8:53 9:23 9:53 10:23 10:53 11:23 11:53 12:23 12:53 13:23 13:53 14:23 14:53 15:23 15:53 16:23 16:53 17:23 17:53 18:23 18:53 19:23 19:53 20:53 21:53


SUN VALLEY 5:02 | 6:02 | | 7:02 | | 8:02 | | 9:02 | 10:02 | 11:02 | 12:02 | 13:02 | 14:02 | 15:02 | 16:02 | 17:02 | 18:02 | 19:02 | 20:02 21:02 22:02

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:05 5:33 6:05 6:33 | 7:05 7:33 | 8:05 8:33 | 9:05 9:33 10:05 10:33 11:05 11:33 12:05 12:33 13:05 13:33 14:05 14:33 15:05 15:33 16:05 16:33 17:05 17:33 18:05 18:33 19:05 19:33 20:05 21:05 22:05

BURBANK # 5:10 5:38 6:10 6:38 6:51 7:10 7:38 7:51 8:10 8:38 8:51 9:10 9:38 10:10 10:38 11:10 11:38 12:10 12:38 13:10 13:38 14:10 14:38 15:10 15:38 16:10 16:38 17:10 17:38 18:10 18:38 19:10 19:38 20:10 21:10 22:10

GLENDALE # 5:17 5:45 6:17 6:45 | 7:17 7:45 | 8:17 8:45 | 9:17 9:45 10:17 10:45 11:17 11:45 12:17 12:45 13:17 13:45 14:17 14:45 15:17 15:45 16:17 16:45 17:17 17:45 18:17 18:45 19:17 19:45 20:17 21:17 22:17

L.A. UNION STATION 5:27 5:56 6:27 6:56 7:06 7:27 7:56 8:06 8:27 8:56 9:06 9:27 9:56 10:27 10:56 11:27 11:56 12:27 12:56 13:27 13:56 14:27 14:56 15:27 15:56 16:27 16:56 17:27 17:56 18:27 18:56 19:27 19:56 20:27 21:27 22:27 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 1:51:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 1:51:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 1:51:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 1:02:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 57:39:00


Train number 201 251 203 253 205 255 207 257 209 259 211 261 213 263 215 265 217 267 219 297 269 221 299 271 223 301 273 225 275 227 277 229 279 231 233 235

Remarks

L.A. UNION STATION 6:04 6:36 7:04 7:36 8:04 8:36 9:04 9:36 10:04 10:36 11:04 11:36 12:04 12:36 13:04 13:36 14:04 14:36 15:04 15:26 15:36 16:04 16:26 16:36 17:04 17:26 17:36 18:04 18:36 19:04 19:36 20:04 20:36 21:04 22:04 23:04

GLENDALE # 6:16 6:47 7:16 7:47 8:16 8:47 9:16 9:47 10:16 10:47 11:16 11:47 12:16 12:47 13:16 13:47 14:16 14:47 15:16 | 15:47 16:16 | 16:47 17:16 | 17:47 18:16 18:47 19:16 19:47 20:16 20:47 21:16 22:16 23:16

BURBANK # 6:23 6:54 7:23 7:54 8:23 8:54 9:23 9:54 10:23 10:54 11:23 11:54 12:23 12:54 13:23 13:54 14:23 14:54 15:23 15:41 15:54 16:23 16:41 16:54 17:23 17:41 17:54 18:23 18:54 19:23 19:54 20:23 20:54 21:23 22:23 23:23

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 6:28 6:59 7:28 7:59 8:28 8:59 9:28 9:59 10:28 10:59 11:28 11:59 12:28 12:59 13:28 13:59 14:28 14:59 15:28 | 15:59 16:28 | 16:59 17:28 | 17:59 18:28 18:59 19:28 19:59 20:28 20:59 21:28 22:28 23:28

SUN VALLEY 6:32 | 7:32 | 8:32 | 9:32 | 10:32 | 11:32 | 12:32 | 13:32 | 14:32 | 15:32 | | 16:32 | | 17:32 | | 18:32 | 19:32 | 20:32 | 21:32 22:32 23:32



NEWHALL # 6:57 7:25 7:57 8:25 8:57 9:25 9:57 10:25 10:57 11:25 11:57 12:25 12:57 13:25 13:57 14:25 14:57 15:25 15:57 | 16:25 16:57 | 17:25 17:57 | 18:25 18:57 19:25 19:57 20:25 20:57 21:25 21:57 22:57 23:57

SANTA CLARITA 7:04 7:33 8:04 8:33 9:04 9:33 10:04 10:33 11:04 11:33 12:04 12:33 13:04 13:33 14:04 14:33 15:04 15:33 16:04 16:18 16:33 17:04 17:18 17:33 18:04 18:18 18:33 19:04 19:33 20:04 20:33 21:04 21:33 22:04 23:04 0:04

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VISTA CANYON 7:14 7:44 8:14 8:44 9:14 9:44 10:14 10:44 11:14 11:44 12:14 12:44 13:14 13:44 14:14 14:44 15:14 15:44 16:14 | 16:44 17:14 | 17:44 18:14 | 18:44 19:14 19:44 20:14 20:44 21:14 21:44 22:14 23:14 0:14

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 7:51 8:51 9:51 10:51 11:51 12:51 13:51 14:51 15:51 16:51 | 17:51 | 18:51 | 19:51 20:51 21:51 22:51 23:51 0:51

PALMDALE 8:02 9:02 10:02 11:02 12:02 13:02 14:02 15:02 16:02 17:02 17:12 18:02 18:12 19:02 19:12 20:02 21:02 22:02 23:02 0:02 1:02

LANCASTER 8:10 9:10 10:10 11:10 12:10 13:10 14:10 15:10 16:10 17:10 17:19 18:10 18:19 19:10 19:19 20:10 21:10 22:10 23:10 0:10 1:10 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:53:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:53:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:53:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 1:08:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 60:27:00

Total Service Hours 118:06:00

= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for turn-around at Vista Canyon = Express Trains = Late Night Train Service

AM PEAK

PM PEAK


METROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINEFor Discussion Purposes Only


4


SCENARIO 5: "Future Scenario 5" - 3 Service Patterns, Clockface Headways All Day


Train number 200 250 204 284 252 208 286 254 212 288 256 216 258 220 260 224 262 228 264 232 266 236 268 240 270 244 272 248 274 252 276 256 278 260 264 266

Remarks

LANCASTER 3:25 4:25 4:54 5:25 5:54 6:25 6:54 7:25 8:25 9:25 10:25 11:25 12:25 13:25 14:25 15:25 16:25 17:25 18:25 19:25 20:25

PALMDALE 3:35 4:35 5:04 5:35 6:04 6:35 7:04 7:35 8:35 9:35 10:35 11:35 12:35 13:35 14:35 15:35 16:35 17:35 18:35 19:35 20:35

VINCENT GRADE/ACTON 3:47 4:47 5:16 5:47 6:16 6:47 7:16 7:47 8:47 9:47 10:47 11:47 12:47 13:47 14:47 15:47 16:47 17:47 18:47 19:47 20:47

VISTA CANYON 4:23 4:55 5:23 | 5:55 6:23 | 6:55 7:23 | 7:55 8:23 8:55 9:23 9:55 10:23 10:55 11:23 11:55 12:23 12:55 13:23 13:55 14:23 14:55 15:23 15:55 16:23 16:55 17:23 17:55 18:23 18:55 19:23 20:23 21:23

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

SANTA CLARITA 4:31 5:04 5:31 5:57 6:04 6:31 6:57 7:04 7:31 7:57 8:04 8:31 9:04 9:31 10:04 10:31 11:04 11:31 12:04 12:31 13:04 13:31 14:04 14:31 15:04 15:31 16:04 16:31 17:04 17:31 18:04 18:31 19:04 19:31 20:31 21:31

NEWHALL # 4:39 5:13 5:39 | 6:13 6:39 | 7:13 7:39 | 8:13 8:39 9:13 9:39 10:13 10:39 11:13 11:39 12:13 12:39 13:13 13:39 14:13 14:39 15:13 15:39 16:13 16:39 17:13 17:39 18:13 18:39 19:13 19:39 20:39 21:39



SUN VALLEY 5:02 | 6:02 | | 7:02 | | 8:02 | | 9:02 | 10:02 | 11:02 | 12:02 | 13:02 | 14:02 | 15:02 | 16:02 | 17:02 | 18:02 | 19:02 | 20:02 21:02 22:02

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:05 5:37 6:05 | 6:37 7:05 | 7:37 8:05 | 8:37 9:05 9:37 10:05 10:37 11:05 11:37 12:05 12:37 13:05 13:37 14:05 14:37 15:05 15:37 16:05 16:37 17:05 17:37 18:05 18:37 19:05 19:37 20:05 21:05 22:05

BURBANK # 5:10 5:42 6:10 | 6:42 7:10 | 7:42 8:10 | 8:42 9:10 9:42 10:10 10:42 11:10 11:42 12:10 12:42 13:10 13:42 14:10 14:42 15:10 15:42 16:10 16:42 17:10 17:42 18:10 18:42 19:10 19:42 20:10 21:10 22:10

GLENDALE # 5:17 5:49 6:17 | 6:49 7:17 | 7:49 8:17 | 8:49 9:17 9:49 10:17 10:49 11:17 11:49 12:17 12:49 13:17 13:49 14:17 14:49 15:17 15:49 16:17 16:49 17:17 17:49 18:17 18:49 19:17 19:49 20:17 21:17 22:17

L.A. UNION STATION 5:27 6:00 6:27 6:43 7:00 7:27 7:43 8:00 8:27 8:43 9:00 9:27 10:00 10:27 11:00 11:27 12:00 12:27 13:00 13:27 14:00 14:27 15:00 15:27 16:00 16:27 17:00 17:27 18:00 18:27 19:00 19:27 20:00 20:27 21:27 22:27

2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:49:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:49:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:49:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 1:05:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 58:18:00


Train number 201 253 203 255 205 257 207 259 209 261 211 263 213 265 215 267 217 269 219 271 299 221 273 301 223 275 303 225 277 227 279 229 281 231 233 235

Remarks

L.A. UNION STATION 6:04 6:29 7:04 7:29 8:04 8:29 9:04 9:29 10:04 10:29 11:04 11:29 12:04 12:29 13:04 13:29 14:04 14:29 15:04 15:29 15:50 16:04 16:29 16:50 17:04 17:29 17:50 18:04 18:29 19:04 19:29 20:04 20:29 21:04 22:04 23:04

GLENDALE # 6:16 6:41 7:16 7:41 8:16 8:41 9:16 9:41 10:16 10:41 11:16 11:41 12:16 12:41 13:16 13:41 14:16 14:41 15:16 15:41 | 16:16 16:41 | 17:16 17:41 | 18:16 18:41 19:16 19:41 20:16 20:41 21:16 22:16 23:16

BURBANK # 6:23 6:48 7:23 7:48 8:23 8:48 9:23 9:48 10:23 10:48 11:23 11:48 12:23 12:48 13:23 13:48 14:23 14:48 15:23 15:48 | 16:23 16:48 | 17:23 17:48 | 18:23 18:48 19:23 19:48 20:23 20:48 21:23 22:23 23:23

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 6:28 6:53 7:28 7:53 8:28 8:53 9:28 9:53 10:28 10:53 11:28 11:53 12:28 12:53 13:28 13:53 14:28 14:53 15:28 15:53 | 16:28 16:53 | 17:28 17:53 | 18:28 18:53 19:28 19:53 20:28 20:53 21:28 22:28 23:28

SUN VALLEY 6:32 | 7:32 | 8:32 | 9:32 | 10:32 | 11:32 | 12:32 | 13:32 | 14:32 | 15:32 | | 16:32 | | 17:32 | | 18:32 | 19:32 | 20:32 | 21:32 22:32 23:32



NEWHALL # 6:57 7:21 7:57 8:21 8:57 9:21 9:57 10:21 10:57 11:21 11:57 12:21 12:57 13:21 13:57 14:21 14:57 15:21 15:57 16:21 | 16:57 17:21 | 17:57 18:21 | 18:57 19:21 19:57 20:21 20:57 21:21 21:57 22:57 23:57

SANTA CLARITA 7:04 7:29 8:04 8:29 9:04 9:29 10:04 10:29 11:04 11:29 12:04 12:29 13:04 13:29 14:04 14:29 15:04 15:29 16:04 16:29 16:37 17:04 17:29 17:37 18:04 18:29 18:37 19:04 19:29 20:04 20:29 21:04 21:29 22:04 23:04 0:04

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VISTA CANYON 7:14 7:41 8:14 8:41 9:14 9:41 10:14 10:41 11:14 11:41 12:14 12:41 13:14 13:41 14:14 14:41 15:14 15:41 16:14 16:41 | 17:14 17:41 | 18:14 18:41 | 19:14 19:41 20:14 20:41 21:14 21:41 22:14 23:14 0:14


PALMDALE 8:02 9:02 10:02 11:02 12:02 13:02 14:02 15:02 16:02 17:02 17:32 18:02 18:32 19:02 19:32 20:02 21:02 22:02 23:02 0:02 1:02

LANCASTER 8:10 9:10 10:10 11:10 12:10 13:10 14:10 15:10 16:10 17:10 17:40 18:10 18:40 19:10 19:40 20:10 21:10 22:10 23:10 0:10 1:10 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 1:50:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 1:50:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 1:50:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 1:12:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 61:18:00

Total Service Hours 119:36:00

AM PEAK


PM PEAK


METROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINEFor Discussion Purposes Only5


SCENARIO 6: Three Patterns: Semi-Hourly Plus Express Service with Hub at Sylmar/San Fernando


Train number 200 250 204 284 252 208 286 254 212 288 256 216 258 220 260 224 262 228 264 232 266 236 268 240 270 244 272 248 274 252 276 256 278 260 DH DH 264 266

Remarks

LANCASTER 3:25 4:25 4:55 5:25 5:55 6:25 6:55 7:25 8:25 9:25 10:25 11:25 12:25 13:25 14:25 15:25 16:25 17:25 18:25 19:25 20:25

PALMDALE 3:35 4:35 5:05 5:35 6:05 6:35 7:05 7:35 8:35 9:35 10:35 11:35 12:35 13:35 14:35 15:35 16:35 17:35 18:35 19:35 20:35


VISTA CANYON 4:23 5:23 5:52 6:23 6:52 7:23 7:52 8:23 9:23 10:23 11:23 12:23 13:23 14:23 15:23 16:23 17:23 18:23 19:23 20:23 21:23

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

SANTA CLARITA 4:31 5:31 6:00 6:31 7:00 7:31 8:00 8:31 9:31 10:31 11:31 12:31 13:31 14:31 15:31 16:31 17:31 18:31 19:31 20:31 21:31

NEWHALL # 4:39 5:39 6:08 6:39 7:08 7:39 8:08 8:39 9:39 10:39 11:39 12:39 13:39 14:39 15:39 16:39 17:39 18:39 19:39 20:39 21:39

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 4:53 5:53 6:22 6:53 7:22 7:53 8:22 8:53 9:53 10:53 11:53 12:53 13:53 14:53 15:53 16:53 17:53 18:53 19:53 20:53 21:53

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 4:54 5:27 5:54 6:23 6:27 6:54 7:23 7:27 7:54 8:23 8:27 8:54 9:27 9:54 10:27 10:54 11:27 11:54 12:27 12:54 13:27 13:54 14:27 14:54 15:27 15:54 16:27 16:54 17:27 17:54 18:27 18:54 19:27 19:54 20:27 21:27 20:54 21:54

SUN VALLEY 5:02 5:34 6:02 | 6:34 7:02 | 7:34 8:02 | 8:34 9:02 9:34 10:02 10:34 11:02 11:34 12:02 12:34 13:02 13:34 14:02 14:34 15:02 15:34 16:02 16:34 17:02 17:34 18:02 18:34 19:02 19:34 20:02 20:34 21:34 21:02 22:02

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 5:05 5:38 6:05 | 6:38 7:05 | 7:38 8:05 | 8:38 9:05 9:38 10:05 10:38 11:05 11:38 12:05 12:38 13:05 13:38 14:05 14:38 15:05 15:38 16:05 16:38 17:05 17:38 18:05 18:38 19:05 19:38 20:05 20:38 21:38 21:05 22:05

BURBANK # 5:10 5:43 6:10 | 6:43 7:10 | 7:43 8:10 | 8:43 9:10 9:43 10:10 10:43 11:10 11:43 12:10 12:43 13:10 13:43 14:10 14:43 15:10 15:43 16:10 16:43 17:10 17:43 18:10 18:43 19:10 19:43 20:10 20:43 21:43 21:10 22:10

GLENDALE # 5:17 5:50 6:17 | 6:50 7:17 | 7:50 8:17 | 8:50 9:17 9:50 10:17 10:50 11:17 11:50 12:17 12:50 13:17 13:50 14:17 14:50 15:17 15:50 16:17 16:50 17:17 17:50 18:17 18:50 19:17 19:50 20:17 20:50 21:50 21:17 22:17

L.A. UNION STATION 5:27 6:00 6:27 6:47 7:00 7:27 7:47 8:00 8:27 8:47 9:00 9:27 10:00 10:27 11:00 11:27 12:00 12:27 13:00 13:27 14:00 14:27 15:00 15:27 16:00 16:27 17:00 17:27 18:00 18:27 19:00 19:27 20:00 20:27 21:00 22:00 21:27 22:27 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 1:52:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 1:52:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 1:52:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 0:33:00 0:33:00 2:02:00 2:02:00 51:33:00


Train number DH DH 201 255 203 257 205 259 207 261 209 263 211 265 213 267 215 269 217 271 219 273 299 221 275 301 223 277 303 225 279 227 281 229 283 231 233 235

Remarks

L.A. UNION STATION 4:30 5:30 6:04 6:30 7:04 7:30 8:04 8:30 9:04 9:30 10:04 10:30 11:04 11:30 12:04 12:30 13:04 13:30 14:04 14:30 15:04 15:30 15:46 16:04 16:30 16:46 17:04 17:30 17:46 18:04 18:30 19:04 19:30 20:04 20:30 21:04 22:04 23:04

GLENDALE # 4:41 5:41 6:16 6:41 7:16 7:41 8:16 8:41 9:16 9:41 10:16 10:41 11:16 11:41 12:16 12:41 13:16 13:41 14:16 14:41 15:16 15:41 | 16:16 16:41 | 17:16 17:41 | 18:16 18:41 19:16 19:41 20:16 20:41 21:16 22:16 23:16

BURBANK # 4:48 5:48 6:23 6:48 7:23 7:48 8:23 8:48 9:23 9:48 10:23 10:48 11:23 11:48 12:23 12:48 13:23 13:48 14:23 14:48 15:23 15:48 | 16:23 16:48 | 17:23 17:48 | 18:23 18:48 19:23 19:48 20:23 20:48 21:23 22:23 23:23

BURBANK AIRPORT - NORTH 4:54 5:54 6:28 6:54 7:28 7:54 8:28 8:54 9:28 9:54 10:28 10:54 11:28 11:54 12:28 12:54 13:28 13:54 14:28 14:54 15:28 15:54 | 16:28 16:54 | 17:28 17:54 | 18:28 18:54 19:28 19:54 20:28 20:54 21:28 22:28 23:28

SUN VALLEY 4:58 5:58 6:32 6:58 7:32 7:58 8:32 8:58 9:32 9:58 10:32 10:58 11:32 11:58 12:32 12:58 13:32 13:58 14:32 14:58 15:32 15:58 | 16:32 16:58 | 17:32 17:58 | 18:32 18:58 19:32 19:58 20:32 20:58 21:32 22:32 23:32

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 5:06 6:06 6:41 7:06 7:41 8:06 8:41 9:06 9:41 10:06 10:41 11:06 11:41 12:06 12:41 13:06 13:41 14:06 14:41 15:06 15:41 16:06 16:10 16:41 17:06 17:10 17:41 18:06 18:10 18:41 19:06 19:41 20:06 20:41 21:06 21:41 22:41 23:41

SYLMAR/SAN FERNANDO 6:42 7:42 8:42 9:42 10:42 11:42 12:42 13:42 14:42 15:42 16:11 16:42 17:11 17:42 18:11 18:42 19:42 20:42 21:42 22:42 23:42

NEWHALL # 6:57 7:57 8:57 9:57 10:57 11:57 12:57 13:57 14:57 15:57 16:27 16:57 17:27 17:57 18:27 18:57 19:57 20:57 21:57 22:57 23:57

SANTA CLARITA 7:04 8:04 9:04 10:04 11:04 12:04 13:04 14:04 15:04 16:04 16:34 17:04 17:34 18:04 18:34 19:04 20:04 21:04 22:04 23:04 0:04

VIA PRINCESSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VISTA CANYON 7:14 8:14 9:14 10:14 11:14 12:14 13:14 14:14 15:14 16:14 16:43 17:14 17:43 18:14 18:43 19:14 20:14 21:14 22:14 23:14 0:14


PALMDALE 8:02 9:02 10:02 11:02 12:02 13:02 14:02 15:02 16:02 17:02 17:32 18:02 18:32 19:02 19:32 20:02 21:02 22:02 23:02 0:02 1:02

LANCASTER 8:10 9:10 10:10 11:10 12:10 13:10 14:10 15:10 16:10 17:10 17:40 18:10 18:40 19:10 19:40 20:10 21:10 22:10 23:10 0:10 1:10 0:36:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 1:54:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 1:54:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 1:54:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 0:36:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 2:06:00 53:42:00

= Short Turn trains. Require arrangements for turn-around at Vista Canyon Total Service Hours 105:15:00

= Express Trains = Late Night Train Service = Out of Service Deadhead Trips

PM PEAK

METROLINK ANTELOPE VALLEY LINEFor Discussion Purposes Only



AM PEAK

6


antelope valley line study - metromedia.metro.net/.../avl_study_appendix_2-task_4.pdf ·...

Documents